[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 96 (Thursday, May 19, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-12054]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: May 19, 1994]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part V





Department of Labor





_______________________________________________________________________



Mine Safety and Health Administration



_______________________________________________________________________



30 CFR Part 75



Underground Coal Mine Ventilation; Safety Standards; Proposed Rule
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Mine Safety and Health Administration

30 CFR Part 75

RIN 1219-AA11

 

Safety Standards for Underground Coal Mine Ventilation

AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health Administration, (MSHA) Labor.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This proposed rule revises stayed provisions of the Mine 
Safety and Health Administration's existing safety standards for 
ventilation of underground coal mines. The proposal also revises, 
clarifies or reproposes certain other provisions in the rule, includes 
some new provisions, and addresses concerns raised during public 
informational meetings and later discussions.

DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before July 18, 1994. 
Commenters are encouraged to send comments on a computer disk along 
with their original comments in hard copy.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments and computer disks to the Mine Safety 
and Health Administration, Office of Standards, Regulations and 
Variances, room 631, Ballston Tower No. 3, 4015 Wilson Boulevard, 
Arlington, Virginia 22203.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia W. Silvey, Director, Office 
of Standards, Regulations and Variances, MSHA, phone (703) 235-1910.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposal contains information collection requirements in 
Secs. 75.312, 75.342, 75.360, 75.363, 75.364 and 75.382. These 
paperwork requirements have been submitted to the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) for review under section 3504(h) of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1980. The respondents would be mine operators. The 
burden hour estimate for Sec. 75.312 includes the time to record any 
fan monitoring system malfunctions, electrical or mechanical 
deficiencies in the monitoring system and any sudden increase or loss 
in mine ventilating pressure, the time for recording main mine fan 
defects that are corrected and for the mine foreman and mine 
superintendent to countersign the record. The burden hour estimate for 
Sec. 75.342 includes the time to develop a written maintenance program, 
to record the calibration tests and to file the record. The burden hour 
estimate for Sec. 75.360 includes the expanded examination time and the 
time for the mine superintendent to countersign the records. The burden 
hour estimates for Sec. 75.362 includes the expanded examination time. 
The burden hour estimate for Sec. 75.363 includes the time for 
recording the hazard, the corrective action taken, the certified person 
initialing the record, the mine foreman and mine superintendent 
countersigning the record and for filing the record. The burden hour 
estimate for Sec. 75.364 includes the time for the mine superintendent 
to countersign the records. The burden hour estimate for Sec. 75.382 
includes the time for recording the results of the examination, for the 
mine foreman and the mine superintendent to countersign the record, and 
for filing the record. The information collected would be used by MSHA 
to assess compliance with the proposed requirements. The information 
collection requirements contained in the proposal are discussed below.
    Proposed Sec. 75.312(g)(1) would require that the records of all 
defects found during the daily fan examination be made by the end of 
the shift on which the examination is made. The record would be made in 
a state-approved book or in a bound book with sequential machine-
numbered pages.
    Proposed paragraph (g)(2)(i) would require that the certified 
copies of data produced by the fan monitoring systems be maintained 
separate from other computer generated reports or data.
    Proposed paragraph (g)(2)(ii) would require that a record be made 
of any fan monitoring system malfunction, electrical or mechanical 
deficiency in the monitoring system and any sudden increase or loss in 
mine ventilating pressure. The record would be made by the end of the 
shift on which the review of the data is completed and would be made in 
a state-approved book or in a bound book with sequential machine-
numbered pages.
    Proposed paragraph (g)(3) would require that at mines permitted to 
shut down main mine fans under Sec. 75.311, if a pressure recording 
device is not used, a record be made of the time and fan pressure 
immediately before the fan is stopped, and after the fan is restarted 
and the fan pressure stabilizes. The record would be made in a state-
approved book or in a bound book with sequential machine-numbered 
pages.
    Proposed paragraph (g)(4) would require that a record of the 
results of the tests be made by the end of the shift on which the 
monthly test of the automatic fan signal device or the automatic 
closing doors is completed. Persons making these tests would record the 
results of the tests in a state-approved book or in a bound book with 
sequential machine-numbered pages.
    Proposed paragraph (g)(5) would require that the records required 
under paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(4) be countersigned by the mine 
foreman, and the mine superintendent, mine manager, or other mine 
official to whom the mine foreman is directly accountable.
    MSHA estimates that it would take about 4 minutes for the mine 
foreman and mine superintendent to countersign the records and would 
take an additional 5 minutes to record main mine fan defects corrected 
and an additional 10 minutes to record any fan monitoring system 
malfunctions, electrical or mechanical deficiencies in the monitoring 
system and any sudden increase or loss in mine ventilating pressure. 
The total estimated recordkeeping burden for all affected mines would 
be 29,608 hours of which large mines would incur 9,657 hours and small 
mines would incur 19,951 hours.
    Proposed paragraph Sec. 75.342(a)(4)(ii) would require mine 
operators to develop and adopt a written maintenance program that would 
have to be made available for inspection by authorized representatives 
of the Secretary and the representative of miners. MSHA estimates that 
it would take about 1 hour to develop a written maintenance program.
    Proposed paragraph (a)(4)(iii) would require that a record of all 
calibration tests of methane monitors be made in a state-approved book 
or in a bound book with sequential machine-numbered pages.
    Proposed paragraph (a)(4)(iv) would require the record of the 
calibration tests to be kept for one year from the date of the test and 
to be retained at a surface location at the mine and made available for 
inspection by authorized representatives of the Secretary and the 
representative of miners.
    A record of calibration tests would be required to be made monthly 
at all mines. MSHA estimates that it would take about 5 minutes to 
complete a record. The total estimated recordkeeping burden for all 
affected mines that concerns developing a written maintenance program 
and maintaining a record of tests would be 2,910 hours of which large 
mines would incur 1,464 hours and small mines would incur 1,446 hours.
    Proposed Sec. 75.360(b)(3) would require a preshift examination to 
be made for sections capable of producing coal by energizing equipment 
on the section. MSHA estimates that this would affect some mines and 
take up to an additional hour per examination.
    Proposed paragraph (f) would require that a record of the results 
of each preshift examination, including a record of hazardous 
conditions and their locations found by the examiner during each 
examination and of the results and locations of air and methane 
measurements, be made in a book provided for that purpose on the 
surface.
    The record would be made by either the certified person who made 
the examination or by a person designated by the operator. If the 
record is made by someone other than the examiner, the examiner would 
be required to verify the record by initials and date. A record would 
also be made by a certified person of the action taken to correct 
hazardous conditions found during the preshift examination. The records 
would be countersigned by the mine foreman, and by the mine 
superintendent, mine manager, or other mine official to whom the mine 
foreman is directly accountable. The record would be made in a state-
approved book or in a bound book with sequential machine-numbered 
pages. MSHA estimates that it would take about 2 minutes for the mine 
superintendent to countersign the records.
    The total estimated recordkeeping burden and the extended 
examination time for all affected mines would be 60,987 hours of which 
large mines would incur 56,015 hours and small mines would incur 4,972 
hours.
    Proposed Sec. 75.362(a)(1) would expand the on-shift examination to 
include sections where anyone is assigned to work during the shift, 
such as those sections where maintenance work is performed. In 
addition, proposed paragraph (a)(2) would add a new requirement for on-
shift examinations to be conducted to assure compliance with the 
respirable dust control parameters specified in mine ventilation plans. 
MSHA estimates that these provisions will expand on-shift examinations 
by up to 45 minutes. MSHA estimates that the total burden hours related 
to expanding the on-shift examination would be 111,434, of which small 
mines would incur 18,007 hours and large mines would incur 93,427 
hours.
    Proposed Sec. 75.363 would require that any hazardous conditions 
discovered be posted, corrected immediately, and recorded. Proposed 
paragraph (a) would require a conspicuous danger sign to be posted at 
any area where hazardous conditions are found. The hazardous condition 
would have to be corrected immediately and only persons designated by 
the operator to correct or evaluate the condition would be allowed to 
enter a posted area.
    Proposed paragraph (b) would require that a record including a 
description and location of the hazardous condition and the corrective 
action taken be kept in a book maintained on the surface at the mine. 
The record would be made by the completion of the shift on which the 
hazardous condition is found. This record would not be required for 
shifts when no hazardous conditions are found or for hazardous 
conditions found during the preshift or weekly examinations because 
these examinations have separate recordkeeping requirements.
    Proposed paragraph (c) would require that the record be made by 
either the certified person or by a person designated by the operator. 
If the record is made by a person designated by the operator, the 
certified person would be required to verify the record by initials and 
date by or at the end of the shift for which the examination was made. 
The record would be countersigned by the mine foreman and by the mine 
superintendent, mine manager, or other mine official to whom the mine 
foreman is directly accountable. The record would be made in a state-
approved book or in a bound book with sequential machine-numbered 
pages.
    Proposed paragraph (d) would require that the record be retained at 
a surface location at the mine for at least one year and be made 
available for inspection by authorized representatives of the Secretary 
and the representative of miners.
    Under the existing rule, the recordkeeping requirement for on-shift 
examinations was included in paragraph (g) of Sec. 75.362 and the 
requirement for retention was in paragraph (h). Under the proposal, 
paragraphs (g) and (h) are removed from Sec. 75.362 and transferred to 
paragraphs (c) and (d) of Sec. 75.363. As the requirement would remain 
the same, there would be no change in the paperwork burden associated 
with the recordkeeping for on-shift examinations. However, this 
recordkeeping requirement would be new for hazardous conditions found 
during supplemental examinations and at times when an on-shift 
examination would not be required. This recordkeeping requirement would 
also be new for hazardous conditions found during the examination 
following a main mine fan stoppage of 15 minutes or longer (75.313).
    MSHA estimates that a record of hazardous conditions found during 
supplemental examinations would be made about 24 times a year at each 
large mine and about 4 times a year at each small mine. MSHA further 
estimates that it would take about 5 minutes to complete a record and 
an additional 7 minutes for the certified person to initial and the 
mine foreman and mine superintendent to countersign the record. The 
total estimated recordkeeping burden for all affected mines would be 
4,092 hours, of which large mines would incur 3,514 hours and small 
mines would incur 578 hours.
    In addition, MSHA estimates that a record of hazardous conditions 
found during an examination following a main mine fan stoppage of 15 
minutes or longer would be made about 100 times a year at large mines 
and 100 times a year at small mines. MSHA further estimates that it 
would take about 5 minutes to complete a record and an additional 4 
minutes for the mine foreman and mine superintendent to countersign the 
record. The total estimated recordkeeping burden for all affected mines 
would be 28 hours, of which large mines would incur 14 hours and small 
mines would incur 14 hours.
    Proposed Sec. 75.364(b) would require an examination for hazardous 
conditions and for noncompliance with mandatory safety or health 
standards that could result in a hazardous condition to be made weekly 
by a certified person.
    Proposed paragraph (h) would require that at the completion of any 
shift during which a portion of a weekly examination is conducted a 
record be made of the results of each weekly examination, including a 
record of hazardous conditions, their locations found by the examiner 
during each examination, the corrective action taken, and the results 
and location of air and methane measurements. The record would be made 
by the person making the examination or a person designated by the 
operator. If made by a person other than the examiner, the examiner 
would be required to verify the record by initials and date. The record 
would be countersigned by the mine foreman and by the mine 
superintendent, mine manager, or other mine official to whom the mine 
foreman is directly accountable. The record would be made in a state-
approved book or in a bound book with sequential machine-numbered 
pages.
    MSHA estimates that it would take about 2 minutes for the mine 
superintendent to countersign the record and an additional 3 minutes to 
record noncompliance with mandatory safety or health standards that 
could result in a hazardous condition. The total estimated 
recordkeeping burden for all affected mines would be 5,457 hours, of 
which large mines would incur 3,048 hours and small mines would incur 
2,409 hours.
    Existing Sec. 75.382(c) requires mechanical escape facilities, 
including automatic elevators, to be examined weekly.
    Proposed paragraph (h) would require that a record of the results 
of the examination of mechanical escape facilities, including any 
deficiency found and the corrective action taken, be made at the 
completion of any shift during which the weekly examination is made. 
The record would be made by the person making the examination. The 
record would be countersigned by the mine foreman and by the mine 
superintendent, mine manager, or other mine official to whom the mine 
foreman is directly accountable. The record would be made in a state-
approved book or in a bound book with sequential machine-numbered 
pages.
    Proposed paragraph (i) would require that the records be retained 
for at least one year at a surface location at the mine and made 
available for inspection by authorized representatives of the Secretary 
and representative of miners.
    A record of examinations would be required to be made weekly at all 
mines that would be governed by Sec. 75.382. MSHA estimates that it 
would take about 5 minutes to complete a record and an additional 4 
minutes for the mine foreman and mine superintendent to countersign the 
record. The total estimated recordkeeping burden for all affected mines 
would be 3,360 hours, of which large mines would incur 3,300 hours and 
small mines would incur 60 hours.
    Send comments regarding these burden estimates or any other aspect 
of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing 
these burdens, to Patricia W. Silvey, Director, Office of Standards, 
Regulations and Variances, MSHA, room 631, Ballston Tower #3, 4015 
Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22203, and directly to the Office 
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 
Attention: Steve Semenuk, Desk Officer for MSHA, room 3001, New 
Executive Office Building, Washington DC 20503.

New Technology for Recordkeeping

    As the complexity of mining increases with the introduction of 
technological improvements and innovations, MSHA foresees that 
electronic storage of records in computer systems could enhance health 
and safety by facilitating rapid access to critical information by 
individuals with the authority and responsibility to direct or redirect 
resources to correct potentially unsafe or unhealthy conditions. 
Records electronically stored also could facilitate trend analysis, 
allowing for earlier detection and correction of potential hazards. In 
addition, the efficiency of accessing various records at a desktop 
computer workstation could promote a more integrated and effective 
approach to mine safety and health.
    MSHA is considering allowing electronic storage of the records and 
certifications required by this proposed rule. Although the Agency 
envisions that such storage would most likely be on a personal computer 
at the mine site, central storage of the records would not be precluded 
as long as immediate access to those records at the mine site were 
available. The use of electronic media for storage of such records 
would have to be accessible, secure, verifiable, and provide for 
necessary backups. MSHA would require both the availability of 
immediate screen viewing of the information and the availability of a 
hard copy printout within 1 hour of a request by MSHA or an authorized 
representative of miners. The records would have to be kept in a secure 
manner that would preclude alteration once the required information is 
correctly entered. MSHA would have to be able to verify that the 
electronic signature of the persons required to sign or countersign 
such records is authentic and entered in a timely manner. Finally, the 
records would have to be periodically backed-up on media separate from 
the computer so that computer failure would not result in the loss of 
data. Although MSHA has not specifically included any such provisions 
in this proposal, the Agency requests comments on the storage of 
records on electronic media, in particular on the safeguards necessary 
to ensure the integrity of such storage.

II. Background

    The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) is proposing to 
revise the definition of return air in Sec. 75.301, and would revise 
Secs. 75.310(a)(3), (a)(4) and (c), 75.311(d), 75.312(a), (b)(1), (c), 
(d), (g)(1), (g)(3), (g)(4) and (h), 75.313(c)(2), (c)(3), (d)(1)(i), 
(d)(1)(ii) and (d)(2), 75.321(a), 75.323(b)(1)(ii), (c)(1), and 
(d)(2)(i), 75,333(a), (b)(1), (b)(3), (b)(4) and (e)(1), 75.334(e), 
75.340(a), 75.342(a)(4), 75.344(a)(1), 75.360(a), introductory text to 
(b), (b)(1), (b)(3), (b)(4), (b)(6), introductory text to (c), (c)(1), 
introductory text to (c)(3) and (f), 75.362(a)(1), (c)(1), (d)(1)(iii), 
and (d)(2), 75.364(a), (b) and (h), 75.370(a)(3), (c)(1), and (f), 
75.371(b), (s), (z) and (bb), 75.372(b)(3), 75.380(d)(3), (d)(4)(ii), 
(d)(5), (f) and (i)(2) of its existing safety standards for ventilation 
of underground coal mines. MSHA is also proposing to redesignate 
Sec. 75.312(f) as (f)(1), and paragraphs (g)(2) and (g)(3) as (g)(3) 
and (g)(4). Section 75.344(b)(2) would be redesignated as 
Sec. 75.344(b)(3). Existing Sec. 75.360(e) would be removed and (f) 
through (h) would be redesignated as (e) through (g). Existing 
Sec. 75.362(a)(2), (g) and (h) would be removed and (d)(1)(i) and 
(d)(1)(ii) would be redesignated as (d)(1)(ii) and (d)(1)(iii). 
Existing Sec. 75.370(b)(1) through (f) would be redesignated as (c)(1) 
through (g). MSHA is further proposing to add new Secs. 75.312(f)(2), 
(g)(2), and (g)(5), 75.320(e), 75.330(c), 75.333(h), 75.344(b)(2) and 
(e), 75.360(b)(8) through (b)(10), 75.362(a)(2), (d)(1)(i) and (g), 
75.363, 75.370(b), 75.372(b)(19) and (b)(20), 75.380(d)(4)(iii), 
75.380(f)(2) and (f)(6) and 75.382(g), (h) and (i). New introductory 
text would be added to Sec. 75.388(c), and new introductory text would 
be added to Sec. 75.389(c). These revisions are proposed in accordance 
with section 101 of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 
U.S.C. 811.
    On May 15, 1992, MSHA published a notice in the Federal Register 
revising its safety standards for ventilation of underground coal mines 
(57 FR 20868). To assure that mine operators could effectively plan and 
implement necessary changes, MSHA delayed the effective date of the 
final rule from August 16, 1992, to November 16, 1992 (57 FR 34683).
    Through discussions with the mining community, the Agency became 
aware of potential problems that could arise through the implementation 
of Secs. 75.344(a)(1) and 75.313. MSHA therefore initially stayed these 
two provisions until July 1, 1993, (57 FR 53856) extended the stay 
until July 1, 1994 (58 FR 31908), and has extended the stay until the 
completion of this rulemaking (59 FR 18485). Sections 75.314, 75.315 
and 75.345 are in effect during the duration of the stay. As proposed, 
Sec. 75.313 would revise paragraphs (c)(2), (c)(3), (d)(1)(i), 
(d)(1)(ii) and (d)(2) of stayed Sec. 75.313 and delete interim 
Secs. 75.314 and 75.315. Also as proposed, Sec. 75.344(a)(1) would 
revise stayed Sec. 75.344(a)(1) and delete interim Sec. 75.345. Section 
75.344(a)(1) was stayed to determine whether requiring all compressors 
to be located in a noncombustible structure or area could create a fire 
hazard due to overheating.
    Section 75.313 was stayed to further consider the effect of fan 
stoppages in certain mines. As written, the standard would have allowed 
circuits and equipment used to withdraw persons from the mine to remain 
energized until the persons are withdrawn. The Agency is concerned that 
under some conditions methane could migrate into haulageways after a 
fan stoppage. This could result in a hazard if all underground 
electrical circuits are not promptly deenergized and all mechanized 
equipment is not shut off.
    On November 16, 1992, the United States Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) issued an order staying the 
application of the air quality standards for oxygen and carbon dioxide 
at 30 CFR 75.321(a). MSHA is continuing to litigate this application of 
the standard. However, in conformance with the Court's order, the 
Agency has suspended indefinitely Sec. 75.321(a) and redesignated the 
first sentence of previous Sec. 75.301 to remain in effect as 
Sec. 75.321(c) (57 FR 55457, November 25, 1992). The result is that, 
with the exception of bleeder systems and worked-out areas, the Agency 
is continuing to apply the oxygen and carbon dioxide limits to all 
areas where persons work or travel as in previous Sec. 75.301. As 
proposed, Sec. 75.321(a) would revise suspended Sec. 75.321(a) and 
delete interim Sec. 75.321(c).

III. Discussion of the Proposed Rule

A. General Discussion

    Underground coal mine ventilation affects various aspects of the 
safety and health of miners. Proper underground coal mine ventilation 
is necessary to protect against mine fires and explosions due in part 
to the presence of explosive gases, oxygen-deficient atmospheres, and 
accumulations of other harmful gases and float coal dust. Ventilation 
is also a primary method of controlling miners' exposure to respirable 
dust and preventing the development of pneumoconiosis (black lung). In 
enacting the statutory ventilation standards of the Mine Act, Congress 
expressly recognized these and related dangers associated with 
inadequate ventilation:

    [V]entilation of a mine is important not only to provide fresh 
air to miners, and to control dust accumulation, but also to sweep 
away liberated methane before it can reach the range where the gas 
could become explosive. In terms then of the safety of miners, the 
requirement that a mine be adequately ventilated becomes one of the 
more important safety standards under the * * * Act.

S. Rep. No. 181, 95th Cong. 1st Sess. 41 (1977), reprinted in Senate 
Subcommittee on Labor, Committee on Human Resources, 95th Cong., 2d 
Sess., Legislative History of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 
1977, at 629 (1978).
    On May 15, 1992, the Agency published a comprehensive revision of 
its ventilation standards for underground coal mines. Because of the 
scope and extensive coverage of the new standards, the Agency held a 
series of informational meetings across the country to brief the mining 
public on the provisions of the new rule. As a result of these meetings 
and other comments received by the Agency at meetings with industry and 
labor groups relative to the ongoing litigation, as well as its own 
review of the application of the regulations, MSHA became aware of 
several provisions that needed to be further evaluated and analyzed. In 
many cases, comments received were verbal. Therefore, any references in 
this preamble to ``comments'' or ``commenters'' do not necessarily mean 
either written or formal comments. Persons wishing to formalize 
comments made during public meetings or other meetings with the Agency 
should submit their comments as a part of this rulemaking.
    In general, the proposed standards specified below address the 
stayed provisions, clarify the Agency's intent, refine the application 
of the rule in light of information received, and more fully address 
the recognized precautions and procedures necessary to avoid hazards 
associated with improper ventilation of underground coal mines. Major 
areas addressed include: examinations, including preshift examinations; 
recordkeeping and certification; involvement of the representative of 
miners in the plan approval process; escapeway dimensions; equipment in 
primary escapeways and fire suppression systems. These standards are 
intended to fit within the comprehensive structure of the ventilation 
rule now in effect.
    In addition, a segment of the mining community has asserted that 
certain provisions concerning the installation and removal of 
mechanized mining equipment were promulgated without the benefit of 
adequate comment. The Agency disagrees. The September 1989 explosion at 
the William Station Mine in Kentucky demonstrates, however, that proper 
ventilation during the installation and removal of mechanized mining 
equipment is essential and can greatly enhance the protection provided 
to miners in these areas. Therefore, for the purpose of receiving and 
giving full consideration to all pertinent comments on this issue, MSHA 
is reproposing each provision that addresses the installation and 
removal of mechanized mining equipment, and is soliciting comments for 
each. The section-by-section portion of the preamble discusses each 
provision affected and the proposed rule sets out the reproposed 
language.
    Since publication of the ventilation rule, the Agency has received 
comments stating that Atmospheric Monitoring Systems (AMS) should be 
permitted to operate by battery backup during fan stoppages and not be 
required to be intrinsically safe. The commenters indicated that the 
information thus provided by the AMS would assist the operator in 
obtaining information regarding the underground conditions of the mine. 
To allow the battery backups would require a revision of 
Secs. 75.311(h) and 75.313(e). The Agency solicits comments on the 
merits and the effect on safety of allowing battery backups and 
conditions, such as low methane levels, that must exist if they are 
permitted to be used.
    Also, since publication of Sec. 75.383, the Agency has received 
comments suggesting that older miners be allowed to individually 
decline participation in escapeway drills. The Agency is not proposing 
any revision to Sec. 75.383; however, comments are solicited as to the 
appropriateness of providing an option which would allow miners to 
individually ``opt out'' of escapeway drills, and the circumstances 
under which miners would be permitted to ``opt out.''
    The Agency solicits comments on the specific provisions addressed 
in this proposal. Comments received that also address other provisions 
will be considered to the extent that they address the issues relevant 
to this proposal.

B. Section-by-Section Discussion

Section 75.301  Definitions
    Since the final rule became effective on November 16, 1992, it has 
come to the attention of the Agency that the Sec. 75.301 definitions of 
intake and return air are being interpreted in a manner not wholly 
consistent with the original intent. Under the proposal, the definition 
of return air would be modified to more clearly convey the intended 
meaning.
    Instances have developed where operators desire to take air from an 
intake air course to ventilate shops, electrical installations, or for 
other purposes, and this air is then coursed directly to the surface 
and is not used to ventilate working places. Under one reading of the 
existing definition, because this air has not ventilated a working 
place or a worked-out area, the air in this air course cannot be 
considered return air. Therefore, a violation could exist in that the 
air ventilating the shop, compressor, or electrical installation was 
coursed into an intake rather than into a return as required. This was 
not the intent of the Agency and no safety benefit is associated with 
such a result.
    Under the proposal, the definition of return air would be modified 
to permit operators to designate certain air courses as return air 
courses for the purpose of ventilating structures, areas or 
installations that are required to be ventilated to return air courses 
and for ventilating seals when this air will not be used to ventilate 
working places. Thus, an operator wishing to split air off of an intake 
for the purpose of ventilating shops, electrical installations, or for 
other purposes, could designate the air course into which the split is 
directed as a return provided the air in the air course would not used 
to ventilate working places or other locations, structures, 
installations or areas required to be ventilated with intake air.
    The Agency does not intend that operators routinely redesignate air 
courses from intake to return. Should questions arise as to the need to 
redesignate an intake as a return, MSHA will be available for 
consultation. Additionally, in order that all interested parties are 
made aware of the redesignation, MSHA is proposing to require in 
Sec. 75.372, Mine ventilation map, that air courses that are 
redesignated from intake to return for the purposes discussed above be 
shown on the mine ventilation map.
Section 75.310  Installation of Main Mine Fans
    Main mine fans provide the means by which mechanically produced 
pressure is supplied to the mine ventilating current. The Agency is 
proposing to revise paragraphs (a)(3), (a)(4) and (c) of Sec. 75.310. 
The existing standard requires, in part, that each main mine fan be 
installed on the surface in an incombustible housing and be connected 
to the mine opening with incombustible air ducts. Paragraph (a)(3) of 
existing Sec. 75.310 requires that each main mine fan be equipped with 
an automatic device that gives a signal when the fan either slows or 
stops. The signal from this device is to be placed so it can be seen or 
heard by a responsible person who has been designated by the operator 
and who is always on duty when persons are underground.
    During informational meetings held with the mining community, it 
was suggested to the Agency that the standard should be clarified in 
two respects. First, it was stated that the provision was not clear as 
to whether the signal must automatically be given at a surface location 
at the mine. Second, the Agency was asked to clarify whether a fan 
monitoring system used in lieu of a circular pressure recorder to 
monitor fan pressure must generate a continuous graph or chart.
    To address the first of these concerns, proposed paragraph (a)(3) 
specifically would require the signal to be given at a surface location 
at the mine where it could be seen or heard by a responsible person 
designated by the operator who is always on duty when persons are 
underground. Under the proposal, two-way communication with working 
sections would continue to be required. The requirement would be 
extended to include established locations where persons are normally 
assigned to work, such as belt transfer points and shops. This 
requirement is consistent with existing Subpart Q--Communications, but 
may require the installation of a limited number of mine phones at 
locations off the section. Many of these locations are routinely 
equipped with two-way communication even though it is not required by 
the existing standard. It is not intended that this communications 
capability be provided in areas where persons are assigned to work 
temporarily, such as areas where secondary roof support is being 
installed or where rock dust is being applied. The requirement that 
two-way communication be provided to locations where persons are 
normally assigned to work is intended to assure that these persons 
receive prompt notification of fan stoppages. Because these work 
locations are off the section, a lack of communication capabilities 
could result in delays in notification and therefore delays in 
withdrawal. The requirement that the signal be given at a surface 
location at the mine is not intended to preclude the signal from also 
being given elsewhere, such as at a central office, as long as it is 
given at the mine as previously discussed.
    The existing rule requires that each main mine fan be equipped with 
a pressure recording device or a main mine fan monitoring system. 
Traditionally, the instrument of choice for recording fan operating 
pressure has been the mechanical, circular pressure recorder. As the 
name implies, this device generates a record of the fan pressure. This 
record is generated continuously as a chart that is replaced weekly. 
Paragraph (a)(4) of the existing rule specifically refers to the use of 
a fan monitoring system as an alternative to the pressure recorder. The 
proposal eliminates this reference since other means of continuously 
monitoring the fan pressure and providing a record may be acceptable. 
Relatively recent advances in technology have permitted the measurement 
and recording through other means. This proposed provision would permit 
the use of this technology for monitoring main mine fan pressure, 
provided, as proposed in paragraph (a)(4), that a continuous record of 
the pressure is maintained. The proposal would require that when a 
pressure monitoring device is used in lieu of a pressure recording 
device, it produce a continuous graph or chart of the fan pressure. A 
hard copy of the continuous graph or chart would be printed at regular 
intervals of not more than 7 days. The generated graph or chart would 
be required to correlate fan pressure to the time and date. The term 
``continuous'' refers to the frequency with which the device polls the 
fan pressure to obtain the data. It is the Agency's understanding that 
typical polling frequency is on the order of a few seconds. MSHA is 
soliciting comments as to an appropriate polling frequency that would 
provide a record that is substantially continuous.
    Records of the fan pressure generated by a pressure monitoring 
device would be maintained in accordance with existing Sec. 75.312(h). 
That is, the records would be maintained at a surface location at the 
mine for at least one year and would be made available for inspection 
by authorized representatives of the Secretary and the representative 
of miners.
    In addition to permitting fan monitoring systems to be used as a 
means of recording fan pressure, the existing rule permits the use of 
other devices for measuring fan pressure under certain circumstances. 
This exception is for mines permitted to shut down main mine fans as 
approved in the ventilation plan. As explained more fully in the 
preamble for Sec. 75.310(a)(4) of the existing rule, this provision 
provides a compliance alternative for small mines that normally operate 
only one shift a day and do not have sealed or unsealed worked-out 
areas. For these mines, the existing rule allows the use of a pressure 
measuring device if the use of the device is approved in the 
ventilation plan for the mine. The proposal would continue this 
practice.
    Paragraph (c) of the existing rule specifies the minimum 
requirements for a fan monitoring system, including the parameters that 
a fan monitoring system must monitor if it is to be used in lieu of the 
daily fan check required by Sec. 75.312. The Agency continues to 
support the use of these systems or any other technology effective in 
enhancing safety but believes, based on comments received, that the 
additional requirements relative to the use of these systems are 
warranted. Specifically, commenters suggested that the information 
generated by fan monitoring systems be provided at a surface location 
at the mine where a responsible person is always on duty when persons 
are underground and that this information be reviewed by mine 
management. The Agency agrees with these suggestions and proposes in 
paragraph (c) to require that when a fan monitoring system is used in 
lieu of the daily fan examination required by Sec. 75.312 the 
monitoring system would be required to have the capability of 
providing, on demand, a printout of the information being monitored. 
This capability is intended to facilitate the review of the information 
by mine management required in Sec. 75.312(b).
    Additionally, the proposal would require in paragraph (c)(5) that 
the fan monitoring system provide monitoring, records, printouts, and 
signals at a surface location at the mine where a responsible person 
designated by the operator is always on duty and where signals from the 
monitoring system can be seen or heard while anyone is underground. For 
the purpose of the standard, a responsible person would be one who 
receives the signal and makes proper notification. As with the 
requirement that fan stoppage signals be given at a surface location at 
the mine, this proposed requirement is not intended to preclude the 
data from the fan monitoring system from also being provided elsewhere 
as long as it is provided at the surface location at the mine. Also, as 
with the requirement for two-way communication at the location where 
fan stoppage signals are monitored, the proposal would require in 
paragraph (c)(5) that the person at the designated surface location 
have two-way communication with working sections and would extend the 
requirement to established locations where persons are normally 
assigned to work, such as belt transfer points and shops. This 
requirement is consistent with existing Subpart Q--Communications, but 
may require the installation of a limited number of mine phones at 
locations off the section. Many of these locations are routinely 
equipped with two-way communication even though it is not required by 
the existing standard. It is not intended that this communications 
capability be provided in areas where persons are assigned to work 
temporarily, such as areas where secondary roof support is being 
installed or where rock dust is being applied.
Section 75.311  Main Mine Fan Operation
    The Agency has received comments that notification of mine 
management officials, having sufficient authority to initiate 
corrective actions is needed to assure that repairs are undertaken and 
to assure continued reliable ventilation of the mine. Paragraph (d) 
would be revised to provide for immediate notification of the mine 
superintendent, assistant mine superintendent, or mine foreman if any 
unusual variance in the mine ventilation pressure is observed, or if an 
electrical or mechanical deficiency of a main fan is detected. The 
standard would require appropriate action or repairs to be instituted 
promptly. The Agency would expect that any necessary arrangements for 
repair personnel and replacement parts would be promptly completed, 
once the problem or need for repair was identified. One of the actions 
appropriate to an unusual variance in pressure would be an immediate 
investigation into the cause. Notification of mine management is 
intended to assure that the appropriate actions are taken and that any 
necessary repairs are completed as soon as possible. Both the 
requirement for notification of mine management and the requirement for 
prompt initiation of corrective actions were included in the previous 
regulation. Although no change was intended, it was suggested that 
these requirements be reinstated so as to eliminate any possible 
confusion that might exist. After reconsideration, the Agency agrees 
that the existing standard could be interpreted contrary to the intent 
and therefore, is proposing the changes discussed. Since the current 
ventilation standards became effective on November 16, 1992, questions 
have arisen concerning the operation of back-up fans. The following 
discussion is intended to address the questions received by the Agency.
    When a back-up fan operates in place of the main mine fan, the 
back-up fan is considered to be a main mine fan and all subpart D 
requirements for main mine fans are applicable. These requirements 
include: the installation requirements of Sec. 75.310, the operation 
requirements in this Sec. 75.311, the examination and recordkeeping 
requirements of Sec. 75.312, and, the unintentional fan stoppage 
requirements of Sec. 75.313, which would apply should a back-up fan 
fail while persons are underground.
    A typical back-up fan application is where a back-up fan producing 
an air quantity comparable to the main mine fan is substituted upon the 
unintentional failure of the main mine fan. Section 75.313 would 
require withdrawal of the miners if the backup fan, or main mine fan, 
is not started within 15 minutes. If the back-up fan is started within 
15 minutes, however, normal work may resume after an examination, since 
the air quantity would be provided. An example would be two identical 
fans at a shaft where one operates as the main mine fan while the other 
is available to back up the main mine fan. Typically, the usage of 
these fans is alternated.
    Another possible application is a back-up fan producing a lesser 
quantity than the main mine fan. In this case, unless the main mine fan 
can be restored to operation within 15 minutes, withdrawal would be 
required under Sec. 75.313. After withdrawal is complete, re-entry 
could be permitted and electrical circuits restored as provided through 
the approved ventilation plan. The Agency would expect operators to 
rely on engineering data or actual ventilation survey results when 
developing these ventilation plan provisions. During operation of the 
back-up fan, the approved ventilation plan would only permit activity 
which is related to maintaining the mine in safe condition. This work 
could include pumping, urgent roof support installation, or other 
safety-related work. The production of coal under these conditions 
would not be permitted unless the mine were adequately ventilated and a 
new ventilation plan has been approved.
    Some multiple-fan ventilation systems are configured such that if 
one fan fails, reduced air quantities continue to ventilate all 
portions of the mine with no potentially hazardous air reversals 
occurring. In such cases, ventilation plan provisions, if supported by 
data, could be developed which would allow re-entry for the purposes 
discussed in the previous paragraph. This activity would be limited to 
maintaining the mine in safe condition until the full ventilation 
system is restored to operation.
    Under existing Sec. 75.311(b)(1), when a main mine fan is stopped 
intentionally and the ventilating quantity of the main mine fan is not 
maintained by a back-up fan, only persons necessary to evaluate the 
effect of the fan stoppage or restart, or to perform maintenance or 
repair work that cannot otherwise be made while the fan is operating, 
are permitted underground. The maintenance or repair work which could 
not be made while the fan is operating is limited to work or repair 
which would endanger the safety of the worker if the fan were 
operating. Examples of the type of work that may not be possible while 
the fan is operating could include maintenance of the fan, repairs or 
adjustments to ventilation controls immediately inby the fan that are 
subject to high pressure differentials, and coating of mine surfaces 
immediately inby the fan. These examples are given for the purpose of 
facilitating understanding and are not considered all-inclusive.
    While the Agency is proposing to change only paragraph (d) of 
existing Sec. 75.311, comments are specifically solicited on the issues 
discussed.
Section 75.312  Main Mine Fan Examinations and Records
    The Agency would revise the existing standard in a number of 
respects. Except in certain situations, a daily examination of the main 
mine fans would be required each day that the mine operates. One 
exception would be the use of a fan monitoring system in accordance 
with Sec. 75.312. Requirements for training, recording of defects, 
review of fan monitoring data, certifying and countersigning of records 
would be added to the rule. Also, the standard would allow underground 
power to remain energized when a fan is shut down for testing of the 
automatic closing doors and fan signal device, provided that the fan is 
restarted within 15 minutes, and would permit an alternative means of 
testing that would not require stopping the fan.
    Proper operation of main mine fans is critical to mine ventilation. 
Paragraph (a) of the proposed rule, like the existing standard, 
requires main mine fans and associated components, including devices 
used to measure and record pressure, to be examined at least once each 
day that the fan operates, unless a functioning fan monitoring system 
is used. However, it is proposed that on any day when no one goes 
underground that a fan examination would not be required. The Agency is 
proposing this approach along with the provision that an examination of 
the fan be completed prior to anyone's entering the mine, including 
certified persons. Such an examination would assure that the fan is 
operating properly. The Agency does not believe that any hazard can be 
associated with not examining a mine fan if no one goes into the mine, 
and solicits comments on this point.
    During the informational meetings and later discussions, the Agency 
was asked to clarify the qualifications of the person designated by the 
operator to make daily fan examinations or the weekly fan examination 
in the case of mines using fan monitoring systems. It continues to be 
the position of the Agency that persons assigned to make this or any 
other examination must be capable of making an adequate examination; 
that is, an examination in a manner that assures the protection sought 
by the standard. For this reason, and to address the concerns raised, 
the proposal would adopt the words of the regulation in effect prior to 
November 16, 1992, Sec. 75.300-4(a), and require in paragraphs (a) and 
(b)(1) that main mine fans be examined by trained persons designated by 
the operator. Since the purpose of the examination, as stated in the 
proposed standard, is to assure the electrical and mechanical 
reliability of the fan, the training that the examiner receives should 
be focused on the electrical and mechanical functioning of fans.
    The proposal, in paragraph (b)(1)(i), reflects comments received by 
the Agency that in order for fan monitoring systems to be effective, 
the data from these systems must be reviewed by mine management each 
day. This review is intended to parallel the daily fan examination and 
assure that responsible personnel are aware of the performance of the 
fan and the fan monitoring system. In paragraph (b)(1)(ii), the 
proposal would retain the requirement that at least once every 7 days 
the monitoring system be tested and the main mine fan be examined. 
Consistent with paragraph (a), as discussed previously, this 
examination would be required to be done by a trained person designated 
by the operator for the purpose of assuring the electrical and 
mechanical reliability of the fan.
    During the informational meetings and later discussions, the Agency 
was also requested to clarify the application of paragraph (c) of this 
standard. Some of the comments concerned whether underground electrical 
circuits must be deenergized while tests of fan signal devices and 
automatic closing doors are performed. Questions also arose as to 
whether anyone could be in the mine during the tests and whether a 
complete Sec. 75.360 preshift examination is required following the 
tests before anyone could enter the mine.
    The proposal clarifies the Agency's intent in paragraphs (c) and 
(d) of the existing Sec. 75.312. The 31-day tests are to determine if 
the alarm activates properly and, in multiple-fan systems, whether the 
automatic doors, if required, close. Although fan stoppages for these 
tests are normally of short duration, it must be recognized that on 
rare occasions difficulty may be encountered in restarting the fans. 
Therefore, the Agency has determined that it is not advisable to allow 
miners underground during tests when the fan is stopped unless 
concurrent activities are scheduled that are necessary to evaluate the 
effect of the fan stoppage or restart, or to perform maintenance or 
repair work that cannot otherwise be done while the fan is operating.
    Another commenter continued to express concern that monthly 
stoppage of fans for testing can cause undue stress on the fans. MSHA 
has received assurances from fan manufacturers that stopping the fans 
monthly to test the signal device will not cause undue stress on fans. 
The Agency has also recently received assurances from motor 
manufacturers that monthly stoppage of fans will not harm fan motors. 
The Agency solicits comments on this issue as well as on any other 
aspect of paragraphs (c) and (d).
    The Agency has received requests for clarification as to whether 
fans stopped for testing must be completely stopped during the 31-day 
tests. The purpose of the standard is to assure proper operation of the 
alarm and doors when a fan fails. Under certain conditions, such as 
with a substantial natural ventilating pressure, the fan blades may 
continue to rotate indefinitely. However, after power has been removed 
and the fan is in the process of stopping, once the alarm sounds and 
the doors close, the test has been successfully completed and the fan 
may be restarted even though the fan blades may not have become 
motionless.
    Recognizing that the duration of these tests is normally short, the 
proposal does not require underground electrical circuits to be 
deenergized unless the fan cannot be restarted within 15 minutes or 
unless persons are permitted underground in accordance with 
Sec. 75.311(b)(1). In accordance with longstanding practice, as 
indicated by a review of fan stoppage plans and consistent with 
existing Sec. 75.313, an examination as described in Sec. 75.360 (b) 
through (e) would be required if the fan is not restarted within 15 
minutes. The Agency believes that after 15 minutes, additional action 
is needed to protect miners from the hazards that may develop following 
a fan stoppage.
    Following publication of the existing standard, commenters 
suggested that it may be possible to test the fan signals and the 
automatic closing doors without shutting off the fans. If it is 
possible to properly test the fan signal and automatic closing doors 
without stopping the fan, then the Agency would permit such an 
alternative. The Agency has become aware that such an approach is being 
actively explored by at least one mining company. Therefore, in the 
interest of allowing for advances in technology in this area, the 
proposal would permit an alternative test that does not require 
stopping the fan when the operator demonstrates that it provides the 
same level of assurance that the automatic closing doors and fan 
signals will function as intended during fan stoppages. Alternative 
approaches to stopping the fan would be required to be approved in the 
ventilation plan. The Agency would anticipate that any alternative 
approach approved would retain the 31 day interval for demonstrating 
that the automatic closing doors or fan signal will operate as 
intended. The Agency solicits comments on this approach to fan tests. 
Specifically, comments should address the method that should be used to 
assure that the alternate test provides the same level of assurance 
that the automatic closing doors and fan signals will function as 
intended during fan stoppages.
    Paragraph (f)(1) retains the requirement in the existing rule that 
persons making main mine fan examinations certify by initials and date 
at the fan or another location specified by the operator, that the 
examinations were made, and that each certification identify the main 
mine fan examined. Consistent with the practice of certifying that fan 
examinations have been completed, the Agency is proposing a 
certification requirement in paragraph (f)(2). The person completing 
the review of the data from a fan monitoring system used in lieu of 
daily fan examinations would certify that the review has been 
completed. The manner of certification would be by initials and date on 
the printout of the data from the system. To facilitate this 
certification, proposed Sec. 75.310(c)(3), as discussed previously, 
would require that the fan monitoring system be capable of providing, 
on demand, a printout of the data.
    Proposed paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(5) would set out the 
requirements for recordkeeping and countersigning of main mine fan 
examination records. Paragraph (g)(1) would require that by the end of 
the shift on which the examination is made, persons making main mine 
fan examinations would record all defects found during the examination 
that may affect the operation of the fan. Unlike the previous standard, 
the existing standard requires that only defects that are not corrected 
by the end of the shift be recorded. The preamble to the existing rule 
explains this approach as follows: ``* * * since the main purpose of 
this recordkeeping requirement is to alert miners on oncoming shifts of 
defects found during the fan examination that may affect their shifts, 
it serves no additional safety benefit to require a record to be made 
of deficiencies which are corrected by the end of the shift on which 
the examination is made.'' However, following publication of the 
standards, the Agency received comments that records of defects, 
corrected or not, serve to indicate recurring problems with mine fans. 
Upon reconsideration, MSHA agrees that recurring problems found during 
main mine fan examinations may be indicative of more serious defects 
and if mine management is not made aware of these problems through the 
maintenance of records they could ultimately lead to a fan failure. 
Therefore, similar to the previous standard, the proposal would require 
that all defects found during the daily fan examination be recorded. As 
with other proposed provisions of the rule, records required in 
paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(4) would be made in a state-approved book 
or in a bound book with sequential machine-numbered pages. Comments are 
specifically solicited on this approach and on an alternative approach 
wherein the Agency would develop, in coordination with the states, 
books specific for the required records.
    Since promulgation of the current regulation, the Agency has become 
aware of some potential difficulties in reviewing records and data 
generated by fan monitoring systems and atmospheric monitoring systems. 
The problem involves the commingling of this information with other 
information, such as production or operations-related data produced by 
the computer systems of which they are a part. Since the physical 
volume of production, operations, and other data may be considerable, 
safety-related data may not be readily accessible which may discourage 
the regular review and proper use of the information. A possible 
solution is to require that all safety related data be printed on a 
dedicated printer. The Agency is not proposing this solution at this 
time but rather is soliciting comments on possible alternative 
solutions. At this time, the Agency is proposing, in paragraph 
(g)(2)(i), that the certified copies of data required by paragraph 
(f)(2) be maintained separate from other computer generated reports or 
data in order to facilitate the review of this data by the operator, 
the representative of miners, and the Agency.
    Proposed paragraph (g)(2)(ii) would require a record to be made of 
any fan monitoring system malfunctions, electrical or mechanical 
deficiencies in the monitoring system and any sudden increase or loss 
in mine ventilating pressure. The records would be used to identify 
chronic or recurring problems with the system that could indicate the 
need for repairs, replacement of parts, or upgrades in hardware or 
software in order to keep the system functioning in a reliable manner. 
The record would be required to be made by the end of the shift on 
which the review of the data is completed. This requirement would help 
to assure that records are current and that potential problems are 
identified in a timely manner.
    Consistent with existing requirements, paragraph (g)(3) would 
require that at mines permitted to shut down main mine fans under 
Sec. 75.311, if a pressure recording device is not used, a record be 
made of the time and fan pressure immediately before the fan is 
stopped, and after the fan is restarted and the fan pressure 
stabilizes. A record of these pressures at both shutdown and restart 
would help identify any adverse change in ventilation that may have 
occurred during the fan stoppage.
    Paragraph (g)(4) would require that a record of the results of the 
tests be made by the end of the shift on which the monthly test of the 
automatic fan signal device or the automatic closing doors is 
completed. This requirement would help to assure that potential 
problems are identified in a timely manner so that proper operation of 
the automatic fan signal device and the automatic closing doors can be 
maintained.
    Paragraph (g)(5) would require that the records required under 
paragraphs (g)(1) through (4) be countersigned by the mine foreman by 
the end of the mine foreman's next regularly scheduled working shift. 
During an absence of the mine foreman, the person acting as mine 
foreman would countersign. The Agency intends that the mine foreman, 
the person most responsible for the day-to-day operation of the mine, 
be notified of the information contained in the reports. Allowing until 
the end of the mine foreman's next regularly scheduled working shift to 
countersign the report would assure that the mine foreman is aware of 
the results of the examination and would enable corrective actions to 
be taken.
    The proposal would also require that within two scheduled 
production days after the mine foreman has countersigned, the record of 
the examination be countersigned by the mine superintendent, mine 
manager, or other mine official to whom the mine foreman is directly 
accountable. The intent of the proposal is to assure that a higher 
level official, empowered to redirect resources, be aware of any 
condition requiring corrective actions. Since this second level 
official may not be physically located at the mine on a full-time 
basis, two scheduled production days are proposed as a reasonable 
period of time for countersigning.
Section 75.313  Main Mine Fan Stoppage With Persons Underground
    This standard establishes safety precautions for any unplanned main 
mine fan stoppage that interrupts ventilation while persons are 
underground. Paragraph (a)(3) requires all persons to be withdrawn from 
working sections and areas where mechanized mining equipment is being 
installed or removed when ventilation is interrupted by a main mine fan 
stoppage. Areas where coal is being extracted or mechanized mining 
equipment is being installed or removed are typically the places in an 
underground mine where methane accumulation and other hazards to health 
or safety can develop quickly when ventilation is interrupted. To avoid 
exposure of miners to these hazards, timely withdrawal of persons is an 
important safety practice. Although the Agency believes that the 
promulgation of paragraph (a)(3) of this standard was done 
appropriately, it is being reproposed for the purpose of receiving and 
giving consideration to all pertinent comments.
    Concerns have been raised about the possibility of methane 
migration following fan stoppage, and the danger of using electrical 
power to withdraw miners should this occur.
    The proposal would revise stayed Sec. 75.313(c)(2) and (c)(3) which 
address deenergization of electric power circuits and shutting-off of 
mechanized equipment not located on working sections. It also would 
revise paragraph (d)(1)(i) and (ii) and (d)(2) which deal with 
examination of the mine before miners can return when power is 
restored. The Agency is not proposing a revision of paragraphs (a), 
(b), (c)(1), and (e) at this time. These paragraphs of stayed 
Sec. 75.313 would remain unchanged from the stayed provision.
    Under paragraph (c)(2) of the proposal, underground electrical 
circuits must be deenergized, except those circuits necessary for 
withdrawal if such circuits are located in areas and haulageways where 
methane is not likely to migrate into or accumulate. The remaining 
energized circuits would be deenergized as persons are withdrawn. The 
Agency recognizes that in a limited number of mines methane may migrate 
from adjacent areas and enter travelways or haulageways used by miners 
for withdrawal. Under these conditions, permitting power circuits to 
remain energized may increase the potential for a methane ignition. The 
determination of the likelihood of methane migrating into haulageways 
can be made through underground tests or computer simulations of 
ventilation systems. It is the intention of the Agency that when it is 
determined that methane is likely to accumulate or migrate into an 
area, electrical circuits used for transportation would not be 
permitted to remain energized and persons would not be permitted to 
ride out of the mine in the event of a fan stoppage. The Agency would 
expect the operator to provide the necessary data from which a 
determination can be made. For the same reasons, paragraph (c)(3) of 
the proposal would require mechanized equipment not located on working 
sections to be shut off unless the equipment is necessary to withdraw 
persons from the mine and is located in areas where methane migration 
or accumulation is unlikely to occur. The Agency solicits comments on 
the appropriateness of this type of mine-specific evaluation that 
balances the expeditious withdrawal of miners against the potential for 
methane accumulations.
    Under paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (ii) of the proposal, the Agency is 
clarifying that when ventilation is restored and before electrical 
circuits are energized or nonpermissible mechanized equipment is 
started, no one other than designated certified examiners would be 
permitted to enter or reenter any underground area of the mine until an 
examination is conducted as described in Sec. 75.360(b) through (e) and 
the area is determined to be safe. This would prohibit nonpermissible 
mechanized equipment from being started until an examination is 
completed. However, permissible equipment may be used to facilitate the 
examination required by the proposal. The Agency recognizes that it may 
not be possible for examiners to enter the mine without some power 
being restored in shafts or slopes to power elevators, hoists, or other 
mechanical facilities operated in the shaft or slope. The Agency does 
not intend to prohibit these facilities from being energized when used 
to facilitate the examination, provided they are in intake air and the 
power is limited to the shaft or slope in which they operate. The 
Agency solicits comments on this approach to fan stoppages.
    This examination would not be equivalent to a full-scale preshift 
examination in that (1) a preshift is conducted within 3 hours 
preceding the beginning of the shift, and (2) the recordkeeping 
requirements of Sec. 75.360 would not apply for the examination 
following a fan stoppage. However, in accordance with proposed 
Sec. 75.363, a record of all hazardous conditions found would be 
required. This type of examination is an accepted safety practice in 
the industry. It is a primary means for determining the effectiveness 
of a mine's ventilation system and of detecting hazards such as methane 
accumulations that may be present in travelways or other areas where 
miners may work after an interruption of ventilation. After a fan is 
restarted, the examination will determine if the air is moving in its 
proper direction and at its normal volume.
    The Agency has reconsidered its position in stayed 
Sec. 75.313(d)(2) and proposed in paragraph (d)(2) to specifically 
require miners, other than designated certified examiners, to continue 
to the surface should the fan restart during withdrawal. A commenter 
has maintained that following a fan stoppage, a hazard could occur due 
to methane accumulations, and therefore miners should not be permitted 
to remain underground. MSHA agrees that such methane accumulations 
could occur, but believes that any risk of ignition would be 
significantly reduced by the requirement that mechanized equipment be 
shut off and electrical power circuits deenergized except for equipment 
and power circuits necessary for withdrawal if located in areas or 
haulageways where methane is not likely to migrate to or accumulate. 
Under stayed Sec. 75.313, the equipment or circuits used for withdrawal 
must be shut off or deenergized as persons are withdrawn. However, to 
provide an added margin of safety, MSHA is proposing withdrawal of all 
miners to the surface except designated certified examiners who may 
begin the examination required before miners return to underground 
areas. The Agency specifically solicits comments on this issue.
    This commenter further stated that when a fan is down for an 
extended period of time, a fan should not be restarted until miners 
safely reach the surface. However, as stated in the preamble to the 
existing rule, MSHA believes that the fan should be restarted as soon 
as possible to reestablish proper ventilation and to remove the 
potential for methane accumulations. The Agency solicits comments on 
the pros and cons of reestablishing ventilation by restarting a mine 
fan during evacuation, and on having miners continue to the surface 
should a fan restart during withdrawal.
    Additionally, the proposal would require that an examination be 
made as described in Sec. 75.360(b) through (e). Although complete 
withdrawal of miners is required, this examination could begin once 
ventilation has been restored and would be performed by certified 
persons designated by the operator to conduct the examination. The 
Agency is proposing this approach because of the safety concerns 
associated with extended interruptions in the ventilation system. It is 
recognized that under Sec. 75.360(a) a preshift examination can be made 
for an oncoming shift while miners are underground. However, the 
proposal would not allow miners to remain underground because of the 
lack of ventilation compared to the situation where ventilation is 
continuously maintained.
Section 75.320  Air Quality Detectors and Measurement Devices
    The informational meetings and later discussions on the rule 
indicated that simply requiring detectors for measuring methane and 
oxygen deficiency to be maintained in permissible condition does not 
completely satisfy the need for assuring proper maintenance. It was 
suggested that without a requirement for maintenance to be done by a 
trained person, similar to that which existed in the previous standard, 
a person with less than the necessary understanding of the instrument 
and the permissibility requirements might be assigned the task. The 
proposal would require that methane detectors and other devices be 
properly maintained at all times and, to assure the appropriate level 
of maintenance, the proposal in paragraph (e) would require this 
maintenance to be done by a trained person. This does not preclude the 
operator from sending instruments to the manufacturer or another repair 
facility for regular servicing.
    Additionally, the proposal would require the operator to assure 
that any instrument sent underground is in permissible condition so 
that the use of the instrument does not pose an explosion hazard. The 
level of care that must be exercised is of course a function of 
instrument usage but, at a minimum, the Agency would expect that the 
detector be visually examined to assure that it is properly assembled 
and that all necessary components such as screws, lenses, and indicator 
lamps are present. As with the requirement that maintenance be done by 
a trained person, this requirement was present in the previous standard 
and is being proposed to further assure that methane detectors do not 
pose a hazard and will perform properly during the shift.
Section 75.321  Air Quality
    This proposal would continue a basic air quality requirement that 
has been in place since 1970 that air in areas where persons work or 
travel contain at least 19.5 percent oxygen and not more than 0.5 
percent carbon dioxide, and the volume and velocity of the air current 
in these areas be sufficient to dilute, render harmless, and carry away 
flammable, explosive, noxious, and harmful gases, dusts, smoke, and 
fumes. The proposal would not require this carbon dioxide level to be 
applied to bleeder entries and worked-out areas.
    MSHA has interpreted former Sec. 75.301 to require at least 19.5 
percent oxygen and no greater than 0.5 percent carbon dioxide in 
bleeder systems where persons work or travel. Similarly, it was the 
intent of the Agency to enforce Sec. 75.321 to require compliance with 
these levels where persons would be exposed in bleeder entries and in 
worked-out areas. However, the application of this provision to 
bleeders has been stayed by the D.C. Circuit pending the outcome of 
litigation on the rule. The Agency continues to believe that providing 
satisfactory air quality is essential to protect the miners and 
examiners whenever they work or travel in bleeder entries and worked-
out areas. Therefore, the proposal includes a new provision specifying 
that the air in bleeder entries and worked-out areas where persons work 
or travel contain at least 19.5 percent oxygen, and that carbon dioxide 
not exceed 0.5 percent TWA (Time Weighted Average) and 3.0 percent STEL 
(Short Term Exposure Limit). A TWA is the time-weighted average 
concentration for a normal 8-hour workday and a 40-hour workweek. A 
STEL is a 15-minute TWA exposure which can not be exceeded at any time 
during a workday even if the 8-hour TWA is within the specified TWA. 
Exposures above the TWA up to the STEL can not be longer than 15 
minutes and can not occur more than four times per day. There must be 
at least 60 minutes between successive exposures in this range. These 
proposed levels are identical to the levels contained in MSHA's 
proposed air quality standards for coal and metal and nonmetal mines 
and the 1992 Threshold Limit Values (TLV) as specified by the American 
Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists.
    In light of the ongoing air quality rulemaking, the Agency is not 
at this time proposing to modify existing air quality standards as 
applied to areas where persons work or travel, other than bleeder 
entries and worked-out areas. The Agency will consider the appropriate 
course of action on this issue as part of the air quality rulemaking.
    Bleeder entries and worked-out areas are required to be traveled or 
evaluated at least weekly. This is most often done by a person 
traveling alone who is often required to be in the bleeder entries or 
worked-out areas for an extended period. The purpose of this standard 
is to protect miners, not to regulate air quality where persons are not 
exposed. Therefore, oxygen and carbon dioxide levels at bleeder 
connectors and bleeder evaluation points that do not meet the proposed 
concentrations would not constitute a violation of the standard if 
examinations are performed remotely or if persons making the 
examination can otherwise remain in air that meets the proposal.
    According to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and 
Health (NIOSH) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 
(NIOSH Respirator Decision Logic, May 1987), 19.5 percent oxygen 
provides an adequate amount of oxygen for most work assignments and 
incorporates a safety factor. Also according to NIOSH, the safety 
factor is needed because oxygen-deficient atmospheres offer little 
warning of danger. In the NIOSH publication, ``A Guide to Safety in 
Confined Spaces,'' (page 4), a chart is presented that indicates that 
19.5 percent oxygen is the minimum level for safe entry into an area, 
and that at a level of 16 percent, judgement and breathing are 
impaired. The American National Standards Institute (ANSI), in ANSI 
Z88.2-1992, ``American National Standard for Respiratory Protection'' 
recognizes that at 16 percent oxygen there is an impairment in the 
ability to think and pay attention, and a reduction in coordination. 
ANSI recognizes that at 19 percent oxygen there are some adverse 
physiological effects, but they are unnoticeable.
    The need for regulating the oxygen level where persons work or 
travel in bleeder entries is illustrated by two mining accidents. One 
of these accidents resulted in the death of a mine examiner and the 
second resulted in the near death of two additional individuals, one of 
whom was a mine examiner. Mine examiners are, through training and 
experience, the individuals best able to identify the hazards 
associated with irrespirable atmospheres. The first accident occurred 
at the Arclar Mine in Equality, Illinois in 1989. Prior to 
implementation of the existing standard, a mine examiner, for unknown 
reasons, entered a worked-out area that was posted with a danger sign. 
Under the existing regulation, ventilation or sealing of this area, 
rather than posting, would be required. Because the area was not 
sealed, the existing regulation would require the area to be examined 
during the weekly examination. The proposal would require that the 
route of travel for the examiner would contain at least 19.5 percent 
oxygen. Had the proposal been in place when the examiner entered the 
worked-out area, there is a strong likelihood that he would not have 
died.
    The second accident, although not in a bleeder entry or worked-out 
area, is illustrative of what can happen when individuals, including 
mine examiners, are subjected to oxygen deficient air. In 1983 at the 
Bird No. 3 Mine in Riverside, Pennsylvania, an assistant mine foreman, 
a certified person, entered the mine for the purpose of conducting an 
examination. After traveling approximately 1100 feet, the examiner 
became dizzy, noticed that his flame safety lamp had extinguished and 
withdrew approximately 200 feet where he sat down and apparently became 
unconscious. A second individual upon entering the area in search of 
the examiner also became dizzy but was able to withdraw to a location 
that was not oxygen deficient. When the mine examiner regained 
consciousness, his cap lamp battery had discharged and he traveled in 
total darkness until he encountered a mine rescue team. Air samples 
collected in the area where the mine examiner first became dizzy 
indicated an oxygen concentration of about 16.8 percent, while other 
samples collected nearby indicated oxygen concentrations of nearly 20 
percent.
    Because mine examiners are required to work or travel in areas 
where oxygen-deficient air could occur without warning, and they 
normally travel and work alone, there must be a requirement that 
provides them the protection necessary for the performance of their 
duties under these conditions. It is important that the level for 
oxygen be established above that identified as resulting in impaired 
judgement because it is essential that individuals traveling in these 
areas remain highly alert. The hazards that can exist in bleeder 
entries and worked-out areas include elevated methane levels, poor 
footing, loose and unstable roof, and water accumulations. For this 
reason, the Agency is proposing to adopt a minimum level of oxygen of 
19.5 percent as recommended by NIOSH.
    MSHA is also concerned with the effects of other gases often found 
in bleeder entries. Section 75.322 of the existing regulation limits 
the concentration of noxious or poisonous gases to the current (1971) 
Threshold Limit Values (TLV's) as adopted and applied by the American 
Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). Section 
75.322 specifically excludes carbon dioxide since it is covered by 
Sec. 75.321. However, in light of the Court's stay of Sec. 75.321(a) 
relative to bleeder entries, the Agency is proposing a separate 
standard for carbon dioxide levels for areas where persons work or 
travel in bleeder entries and worked-out areas. The levels proposed, 
0.5 percent TWA and 3.0 percent STEL, when considered in conjunction 
with the requirements of Sec. 75.322 and the proposed requirement for 
oxygen, will aid in providing persons working or traveling in these 
areas with a safe and healthful working environment. The Agency 
recognizes that the effects of carbon dioxide are both chronic and 
acute and has therefore elected to propose both a time weighted average 
and a short term exposure limit. NIOSH, in recommending a standard for 
carbon dioxide, also recognized this and recommended a similar 
approach. The NIOSH recommendation, made in a Criteria Document 
published in 1976, proposed a TWA concentration of 1.0 percent and a 
ceiling value of 3.0 percent not to exceed 10 minutes. In making this 
recommendation, NIOSH states that there are ``additive stress effects 
of increased carbon dioxide concentrations and exercise * * *'' As 
support for this, the NIOSH document cites research that showed that 
healthy, trained subjects exposed to 2.8 to 5.2 percent carbon dioxide 
at maximum exercise levels experienced respiratory difficulty, impaired 
vision, severe headache, and mental confusion; three subjects 
collapsed. At or below 2.8 percent carbon dioxide combined with lower, 
but still strenuous, levels of exercise, no ill effects other than 
awareness of increased ventilation were experienced by the subjects.
    During rulemaking on the proposed air quality standard, NIOSH 
recommended a 0.5 percent TWA and a 3.0 percent STEL. NIOSH made a 
similar recommendation to OSHA during that Agency's permissible 
exposure limit (PEL) rulemaking. Given the work environment in bleeder 
entries and worked-out areas, as described earlier, the Agency believes 
that the dual regulatory approach proposed is appropriate. In addition 
to examiners, other miners may be required to work in the bleeder 
entries and worked-out areas, performing duties such as installing roof 
support, pumping water, recovering materials or adjusting ventilation. 
The levels proposed would provide them with the necessary protection.
    In addition, MSHA is concerned with the synergistic effects that 
carbon dioxide has on the body when combined with low oxygen levels, 
especially at levels higher than 0.5 percent TWA. Carbon dioxide 
affects the blood pH, which is critical to the proper metabolism of 
oxygen. Because of the nature of the hazardous work environment in 
bleeder entries and worked-out areas, the Agency believes that it must 
be careful to establish levels which would not impact on the body's 
ability to deal with the conditions encountered. The Agency solicits 
comments on the appropriateness of these, or other concentration levels 
for carbon dioxide in areas where the examiner works or travels in 
bleeder entries and worked-out areas, along with the rationale for 
determining the appropriate level for bleeder entries and worked-out 
areas. However, as stated previously, it is not the intent of the 
Agency that the levels established in paragraph (2) of the proposed 
standard be applied to areas other than those areas within the bleeder 
entries and worked-out areas where persons work or travel. In light of 
this, it is not anticipated that many of the nation's coal mines would 
be required to increase the volume of air currently being used to 
ventilate bleeders and worked-out areas as a result of this proposed 
standard.
Section 75.323  Actions for Excessive Methane
    MSHA is proposing to revise paragraphs (b)(1)(ii), (c)(1), and 
(d)(2)(i) of the existing standard in response to comments made during 
informational meetings and subsequent discussions.
    Methane poses a significant hazard to miners when it is permitted 
to accumulate without corrective action being taken quickly. The Agency 
received comments at its informational meetings asking MSHA to clarify 
when ventilation changes must be made to reduce methane concentrations 
to acceptable levels. MSHA has always intended that these changes be 
made at once. In response to these comments, the Agency is proposing to 
revise paragraphs (b)(1)(ii), (c)(1) and (d)(2)(i) to require that 
these changes be made ``at once,'' the phrase used in former 
Secs. 75.308 and 75.309.
    Although the Agency believes that the promulgation of paragraph (b) 
of this standard was done appropriately, it is being reproposed with 
the addition of the phrase ``at once'' for the purposes of receiving 
and giving consideration to all pertinent comments. When 1.0 percent or 
more methane is present in a working place, an intake air course, or an 
area where mechanized mining equipment is being installed or removed, 
paragraph (b)(1) would require all electrical, diesel, and battery-
powered equipment in the affected working place, intake air course or 
other area, except for intrinsically safe AMS, to be deenergized or 
shut off. Deenergizing or shutting off this equipment would protect 
miners by preventing this equipment from providing ignition sources.
    If 1.5 percent methane or more is present in a working place, an 
intake air course, or an area where mechanized mining equipment is 
being installed or removed, paragraph (b)(2) would require persons to 
be withdrawn from the affected area. The basic requirement for 
withdrawal of persons is retained from the previous standard and the 
reproposal would expand this basic requirement to include areas where 
mechanized mining equipment is being installed or removed. The presence 
of methane in these areas can pose a significant risk to miners and 
therefore their withdrawal from the affected area is essential to their 
safety. Paragraph (b)(2) would also require that all electric power to 
equipment in affected areas be disconnected at the power source. This 
prevents accidental reenergization of equipment and removes power from 
cables and circuits which may also be ignition sources. No other work 
is permitted in the affected area until the concentration of methane is 
less than 1.0 percent.
    Paragraph (b)(2) would be amended by adding ``mechanized'' before 
mining equipment for consistency with other provisions of the rule.
Section 75.324  Intentional Changes in the Ventilation System
    MSHA is not proposing any changes to the wording of Sec. 75.324 at 
this time. The following discussion clarifies MSHA's interpretation of 
what the Agency considers to be an intentional change that could 
materially affect the safety or health of persons in the mine.
    Paragraph (a) of the existing rule requires that a ventilation 
change be supervised by a person designated by the mine operator when a 
change in section ventilation is in excess of a specified quantity or 
when a ventilation change alters the main air current of the mine or 
any split of the main air current in a manner that could materially 
affect the safety or health of miners underground. Paragraph (b) of the 
existing rule specifies additional requirements that apply only to the 
ventilation changes described in paragraph (a) of this section. That 
is, before such an intentional air change is made, electric power must 
be removed from areas that may be affected by the change and mechanized 
equipment in those areas must be shut off. Also, only persons making 
the ventilation change are permitted in the mine while the change is 
being made. Afterward, certified persons must examine the areas 
affected by the change to determine whether methane accumulations or 
oxygen deficiencies have resulted. Electric power is not permitted to 
be restored to affected areas nor is mechanized equipment to be 
restarted until these tests have been made and the areas are determined 
to be safe.
    Since this standard went into effect in November 1992, the Agency 
has become aware of concerns suggesting that it is sometimes difficult 
to determine whether an intentional change in the air current could 
materially affect the safety or health of miners. However, MSHA regards 
it as impractical to follow a ``cookbook'' approach to identifying what 
will or will not require approval. Each circumstance is to be reviewed 
by the operator on its own merits. To illustrate the Agency's 
expectations, the following is a list of some examples of what MSHA 
considers intentional changes that would materially affect the safety 
or health of miners. These examples are not meant to include all 
possibilities, but are meant to provide some general guidance: adding a 
new shaft; bringing a new fan on line; changing the direction of air in 
an air course; changing the direction of air in a bleeder system; 
shutting down one fan in a multiple fan system; starting a new 
operating section with ventilating quantities redistributed from other 
sections of the mine; changing entries from intakes to returns and vice 
versa; and any change that affects the information required by 
Sec. 75.371, Mine ventilation plan; contents.
    The results of changes to a complex ventilation system are not 
always easy to predict, and for that reason caution must be used when 
making significant changes to one air split or several air splits. The 
balance of splits can be affected and may result in air reversals, dead 
air spaces, or insufficient air flow in critical areas. For this 
reason, such changes must be evaluated by a certified person examining 
the affected areas before production is resumed. Approval is required 
by paragraph (c) of Sec. 75.370 Mine ventilation plan; submission and 
approval, if the change alters the main air current in a manner that 
could materially affect the safety or health of miners. When questions 
arise as to whether an anticipated change requires prior approval, MSHA 
is available to discuss the situation for guidance on whether a request 
for approval should be submitted. While the Agency is not contemplating 
a change to Sec. 75.324 at this time, comments are specifically 
solicited on the issues discussed.
Section 75.325  Air Quantity
    Although the Agency believes that the promulgation of paragraph (d) 
of this standard was done appropriately, it is being reproposed for the 
purposes of receiving and giving consideration to all pertinent 
comments. Paragraph (d) would require that areas where mechanized 
mining equipment is being installed or removed be ventilated and that 
the quantity of air and the ventilation controls necessary to provide 
these quantities be specified in the approved ventilation plan. As 
demonstrated by the explosion at the William Station Mine, ventilation 
of these areas is essential and will greatly enhance the protection 
provided to miners.
Section 75.330  Face Ventilation Control Devices
    During the informational meetings and later discussions, it became 
apparent that members of the mining community were concerned about the 
appropriateness of using a performance standard relative to the volume 
of air that must be provided to working faces. It was suggested that 
such an approach suffered from two flaws: (1) By simply requiring 
sufficient air, a problem could develop and go unnoticed before 
corrective action is required; and (2) since most miners do not have 
the means for measuring ventilation parameters; i.e., anemometers and 
methane detectors, it may not be possible for the average miner to 
determine compliance with the performance standard. It has been 
suggested that in addition to the performance standard, the Agency 
should propose requirements for line brattice similar to those that 
existed in the previous regulation. After considering this 
recommendation in light of the expressed concerns, the Agency is 
proposing, in paragraph (c), that when a line brattice or other face 
ventilation control device is damaged to the extent that ventilation of 
the working face is inadequate, production activities would cease until 
necessary repairs are made. It is the intent of the Agency to assure 
that damaged ventilation controls are repaired and that mining is 
discontinued until adequate face ventilation is restored.
Section 75.332  Working Sections and Working Places
    Although the Agency believes that the promulgation of paragraph 
(a)(1) of this standard was done appropriately, it is being reproposed 
for the purposes of receiving and giving consideration to all pertinent 
comments. The ventilation of working areas has historically been 
accomplished through the use of a separate split of intake air. The 
proposal would provide this same level of protection to miners working 
in areas where equipment is being installed or removed.
    The Agency is not proposing any changes to Sec. 75.332 at this 
time. However, questions have come to the attention of the Agency 
concerning the existing standard. The following discussion is intended 
to address these questions.
    The existing requirements of Sec. 75.332 are largely derived from 
earlier MSHA regulations (Sec. 75.311 and Sec. 75.312). Under existing 
Sec. 75.332, air which has passed through any area not examined under 
Sec. 75.360, Sec. 75.361 or Sec. 75.364, or through any area which has 
been second mined, cannot be used to ventilate any working place. After 
the rule became effective, it was suggested that it would be possible 
to ventilate working places with intake air coursed through an 
evaluated, nonpillared worked-out area, because evaluation in lieu of 
travel to the point of deepest penetration is at some times acceptable 
under Sec. 75.364. As explained in the following discussion, this is 
not the case. Existing Sec. 75.332(a)(1) requires that each working 
section and each area where mechanized mining equipment is being 
installed or removed be ventilated by a separate split of ``intake 
air.'' Existing Sec. 75.301 defines return air as ``Air that has 
ventilated the last working place of any working section or any worked-
out area, whether pillared or nonpillared * * *.'' Reading these two 
existing provisions together, one concludes that air that has 
ventilated a worked-out area is return air and therefore cannot be used 
to ventilate any working section or any area where equipment is being 
installed or removed.
    A second question concerns the conditions under which air that has 
passed by an unsealed worked-out area can be used to ventilate a 
working section. Worked-out areas that are not sealed must be 
ventilated, Sec. 75.334(a). Under Sec. 75.332(b)(1) the air used to 
ventilate worked-out areas cannot be used to ventilate working 
sections, unless examined in accordance with Sec. 75.360, Sec. 75.361, 
or Sec. 75.364. There is only one condition under which air that passes 
by a worked-out area that is not examined can be used to ventilate a 
working section or an area where equipment is being installed or 
removed. This is when the worked-out area is ventilated by a separate 
split of air and the remainder of the intake air continues past the 
worked-out area. This remaining intake air could be used to ventilate a 
working section or an area where equipment is being installed or 
removed. However, the air that enters the worked-out area cannot 
reenter the intake air course because the definition of return air, in 
Sec. 75.301, states in part that ``If air mixes with air that has 
ventilated the last working place on any split of any working section 
or any worked-out area, whether pillared or nonpillared, it is 
considered return air.'' In the case of worked-out areas with multiple 
openings, this would preclude air from being used to ventilate a 
working place when it enters a worked-out area in one entry and exits 
the worked-out area in another entry to remix with the air passing by.
    To determine that the air that has passed by a worked-out area has 
not been contaminated, proposed Sec. 75.360(b)(4) would require that 
when intake entries carry air by worked-out areas to ventilate working 
places where persons are scheduled to work, the approaches to the 
worked-out areas be preshift examined immediately inby and outby each 
entry that carries air into the worked-out area. The purpose of this 
examination is to assure that the air is not oxygen deficient and does 
not contain methane in excess of allowable limits and to determine that 
the air is not coming from the worked-out area. By preshift examining 
the intake entries in these areas, it can be determined that the air in 
these entries is suitable for use in working places. Additionally, 
proposed Sec. 75.360(b)(4) would require that when intake entries carry 
air by worked-out areas to ventilate working places where persons are 
scheduled to work, the entries used to carry air into the worked-out 
area be preshift examined at a point immediately inby the intersection 
of each entry with the intake air course. Preshift examining of these 
entries is intended to assure that air that enters a worked-out area in 
one entry does not reenter the intake air course.
    While the Agency is not contemplating a change to Sec. 75.332 at 
this time, comments are specifically solicited on the issues discussed.
Section 75.333  Ventilation Controls
    The Agency is proposing to revise paragraphs (a), (b)(1), (b)(3), 
(b)(4), and (e)(1) and add new paragraph (h) to Sec. 75.333.
    As proposed, paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(3), and (b)(4) would be revised 
to clarify the application of the permanent ventilation control 
standards when a continuous face haulage system is used. Continuous 
face haulage systems employ mobile bridge conveyors to transport coal 
directly from the continuous mining machine to a low profile conveyor 
belt. The mobile bridge system uses a ``dolly'' to transfer the coal to 
the low profile conveyor belt at the section loading point. Because the 
dolly travels along the low profile conveyor belt, the location of the 
section loading point changes during mining as the mobile bridge dolly 
moves. For escapeway purposes, paragraph (b)(4) would designate the 
loading point for a continuous haulage system as the inby most point of 
travel of the dolly.
    In the past, the Agency has not required the use of permanent 
ventilation controls to separate continuous face haulage systems from 
return, intake, or primary escapeway entries in rooms developed 600 
feet or less from the centerline of the entry from which the rooms were 
developed. As with the existing standard, proposed paragraph (b)(1) 
would require permanent stoppings or other permanent ventilation 
control devices between intake and return air courses, except temporary 
controls may be used in rooms that are 600 feet or less from the 
centerline of the entry from which the room was developed. The proposal 
would clarify the existing standard by explicitly stating that when 
continuous face haulage systems are used, temporary controls may be 
used to separate the system from the return and intake in rooms 
developed 600 feet or less from the centerline of the entry from which 
the rooms were developed. Because the room in which the continuous 
haulage system is installed is continuously attended by the system 
operators, an immediate response to any safety-related problem with the 
haulage system would be expected. Additionally, two or three rooms are 
often concurrently developed using this system and the life of the 
actively developing rooms is often less than three days. The result of 
this short life is that mining in these rooms would often be completed 
before construction of permanent controls is finished. The proposal 
recognizes the short-lived nature of these rooms and permits the use of 
properly constructed temporary controls to deliver ventilation to the 
faces. Requiring the construction of permanent controls in these 
instances would result in no additional safety benefit. The Agency has 
also received comment that additional material handling hazards would 
be associated with the transportation of permanent control construction 
materials into an often limited number of rooms during development. 
Additionally, access to the continuous haulage system is required 
through crosscuts for maintenance and operation of the system.
    For these reasons, proposed paragraph (b)(3) would also be revised 
to require that when continuous face haulage systems are used, 
permanent stoppings or other permanent ventilation control devices must 
be built and maintained to separate the haulage entry in which the low 
profile belt structure is located from intake entries only to the outby 
travel point of the dolly. The proposal would also provide that for 
continuous haulage systems, temporary ventilation controls may be used 
in rooms that are 600 feet or less from the centerline of the entry 
from which the rooms were developed. In all other cases permanent 
stoppings or other permanent ventilation control devices would continue 
to be required to separate belt conveyor haulageways from intake air 
courses when air in the intake air course is used to provide air to 
active working places.
    Proposed paragraph (b)(4) would continue to require permanent 
stoppings or other permanent ventilation control devices ``* * * to 
separate the primary escapeway from belt and trolley haulage entries, 
as required by Sec. 75.380(g).'' In addition, the proposal would 
require that when continuous face haulage systems are used, the loading 
point for purposes of Sec. 75.380(g) would be the inby most point of 
travel of the dolly. The Agency intends that this separation be 
maintained to the most inby point of travel of the dolly in order to 
provide protection along the entire length of the conveyor belt entry. 
A greater or lesser distance for the separation of the conveyor belt 
structure from the primary escapeway may be specified and approved in 
the ventilation plan provided it poses no hazard to miners. This 
provision is consistent with the requirements of Sec. 75.380(g).
    The portion of the structure necessary to accommodate the movement 
of the dolly is considered as part of the face haulage system. 
Consistent with current MSHA policy, waterlines would not be required 
to parallel continuous face haulage systems using a low profile 
conveyor belt if the length of the belt is less that 600 feet and 
sufficient fire hose is available to extend to the working face. Fire 
suppression devices and signal and alarm systems are not required to be 
installed along such conveyor belts. However, the belts considered as 
face equipment must have fire protection at the belt drive as required 
by Sec. 75.1100-2(e) of the existing standard and, if hydraulically 
operated, must have fire suppression devices as required by existing 
Sec. 75.1107. Additionally, for safety reasons, check curtains should 
not be installed across the area of travel of the dolly.
    The Agency has become aware of questions on the part of a segment 
of the industry relative to what are acceptable construction methods 
and materials for the construction of permanent ventilation controls, 
excluding seals, that will result in controls that satisfy the 
definition of durable given in paragraph (a) of the existing standard. 
The Agency is addressing these questions by proposing to eliminate the 
definition of durable and to modify paragraph (e)(1) to require these 
controls to be constructed in a manner and of materials that results in 
a construction that has been tested and shown to have a minimum 
strength of 39 pounds per square foot as tested under ASTM E72-80 
Section 12--Transverse Load-Specimen Vertical, load only. The proposal 
retains the intent and requirement of the existing standard because the 
8-inch hollow-core concrete block stopping with mortared joints, to 
which all other constructions were tied under the definition of durable 
in the existing standard, has been tested and shown to have a minimum 
strength of 39 pounds per square foot.
    The Agency recognizes that other construction methods and materials 
may be available or developed that will result in permanent ventilation 
controls that are suitable for the intended purpose. The proposal would 
permit alternative constructions for ventilation controls constructed 
after [INSERT THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS RULE] under paragraph 
(e)(1)(i) provided they have been tested and shown to have a minimum 
strength of 39 pounds per square foot. For a control to be acceptable, 
the operator would have to demonstrate that the control has been tested 
and shown to provide a strength of 39 pounds per square foot as tested 
under ASTM E72-80 Section 12--Transverse Load-Specimen Vertical, load 
only. In instances where a construction has already been tested and 
shown to possess the requisite strength, the operator need only provide 
documentation of the test results. MSHA will maintain and will make 
available for review at each MSHA District Office a listing of 
construction methods and materials that have been tested and have 
demonstrated a strength of at least 39 pounds per square foot. Persons 
wishing to have a construction method or material included in this 
listing should submit documentation of testing to the Agency. To the 
extent possible, MSHA will also maintain a listing of construction 
methods and materials that have failed to demonstrate a strength of at 
least 39 pounds per square foot when tested under ASTM E72-80 Section 
12--Transverse Load-Specimen Vertical, load only. Persons wishing to 
have a construction method or material included in this listing should 
submit documentation of testing to the Agency. It should be noted that 
solid concrete block stoppings that are dry-stacked and plastered on 
only one side have not been shown to have a minimum strength of at 
least 39 pounds per square foot when tested under ASTM E72-80 Section 
12--Transverse Load-Specimen Vertical, load only. Unless a stronger 
plaster is developed, it is unlikely that a stopping plastered on only 
one side would be acceptable under the current rule or this proposed 
revision.
    As with the existing rule, the proposal would require, in paragraph 
(e)(1)(ii), that all overcasts, undercasts, shaft partitions, permanent 
stoppings, and regulators, installed after November 15, 1992, be 
constructed of noncombustible material.
    Also like the existing standard, the proposal lists materials that 
would be suitable for these controls and would continue to prohibit 
ventilation controls installed after November 15, 1992, from being 
constructed of aluminum.
    The Agency is proposing a new paragraph (h) to assure that all 
permanent ventilation controls, including all doors and seals, 
regardless of the construction date, be maintained to serve the purpose 
for which they were built. Existing Sec. 75.333(e)(1) requires that 
ventilation controls be maintained to serve the purpose for which they 
were built. Because existing Sec. 75.333(e)(1) also specifies that 
ventilation controls installed after November 15, 1992, be constructed 
of durable and noncombustible material, a commenter questioned whether 
the maintenance requirement applied only to ventilation controls 
constructed after November 15, 1992. That is not the case. Given the 
importance of these devices in preserving the integrity of the mine 
ventilation system, MSHA is proposing the maintenance provision in a 
new paragraph to explicitly state that all permanent ventilation 
controls, including seals, must be maintained to serve their intended 
purpose. With regard to seal maintenance, the Agency does not intend 
that the maintenance standard would be applied to seals located within 
another sealed area. Further, the Agency does not intend that the 
standard would apply to seals which have become consumed within a gob 
area which is ventilated and evaluated in a manner approved through the 
mine ventilation plan.
Section 75.334  Worked-out Areas and Areas Where Pillars Are Being 
Recovered
    MSHA is proposing to revise paragraph (e) and to repropose existing 
paragraph (f). A requirement would be added in paragraph (e) that 
provides that in addition to designing mining systems so that worked-
out areas can be sealed, the location and sequence of construction of 
proposed seals would also be specified in the approved ventilation 
plan. Improper location and sequencing of seal construction can have a 
deleterious effect on mine air quality and ventilation and therefore 
the location and sequence of construction of these seals should be 
reviewed and approved as a part of the ventilation plan. Under the 
previous standard, the proposed location and sequence of construction 
of all necessary mine seals was required to be submitted for approval 
as part of the sealing plan required by Sec. 75.330. Under the existing 
standard, the location of proposed seals is required to be shown on the 
ventilation map required by Sec. 75.372. Showing the location on the 
map does not subject the location to approval and therefore the Agency 
agrees that it does not satisfy the objective of assuring proper 
location and sequencing. The proposal would rectify this situation.
    Through meetings with various segments of the mining community, the 
Agency also became aware of a concern that paragraph (f) of Sec. 75.334 
may have been promulgated without the benefit of adequate comment. 
Paragraph (f) addresses mines with a demonstrated history of 
spontaneous combustion or those located in coal seams determined to be 
susceptible to spontaneous combustion. Although the Agency believes 
that the promulgation of paragraph (f) of this standard was done 
appropriately, it is being reproposed for the purposes of receiving and 
giving consideration to all pertinent comments.
    As discussed in the preamble to the existing standard, several 
commenters suggested that bleeder systems should not be required for 
all mines, stating that in some mines the practice of ventilating 
worked-out areas increases the risk of spontaneous combustion by 
supplying oxygen to combustion-prone materials in these areas. These 
commenters requested that the final rule include provisions to address 
spontaneous combustion. MSHA recognized the need to reduce the flow of 
oxygen to areas where there is a likelihood of spontaneous combustion 
and the existing rule requires the approved ventilation plan to address 
spontaneous combustion in mines with a demonstrated history of this 
hazard or mines that are located in coal seams determined to be 
susceptible to spontaneous combustion.
    Experience gained through application of this standard has 
demonstrated that paragraph (f) applies to only a few mines. However, 
studies by the Bureau of Mines have identified the volatile properties 
of coal seams and have determined that certain seams are susceptible to 
spontaneous combustion. The existing standard, as reproposed, is also 
directed to mines in these seams.
    Under paragraph (f) of the proposal, the approved ventilation plans 
for mines that are susceptible to spontaneous combustion must specify 
measures to detect methane, carbon monoxide, and oxygen concentrations 
in worked-out areas. These measures must be taken during and after 
pillar recovery and in worked-out areas where no pillars have been 
recovered. The purpose of these measures is to determine if worked-out 
areas must be ventilated or sealed. If the methane concentration or 
other hazards in the worked-out area cannot be controlled while the 
mine is limiting airflow to avoid spontaneous combustion, it may be 
necessary to ventilate or seal the worked-out area. These measures also 
help to determine the extent to which the worked-out areas can be 
ventilated without increasing the spontaneous combustion hazard.
    The Agency is concerned with the inability of some mines that have 
a spontaneous combustion problem to reduce the oxygen content to a 
sufficiently low level. It is well known that the oxygen level in a gob 
varies depending on the location where the measurement is made. For 
example, the periphery of a gob normally will have higher oxygen levels 
than the interior of the gob. The oxygen level in the interior of the 
gob is critical when dealing with spontaneous combustion. If conditions 
are such that the oxygen content in critical areas within a gob cannot 
be reduced below that necessary for a methane ignition to occur, a 
bleederless system may not be appropriate. The Agency solicits comments 
on this subject.
    Under the provisions of paragraph (f) the operator is required to 
specify the action that will be taken to protect miners from the 
hazards of spontaneous combustion. This requirement would be triggered 
if the mine has a demonstrated history of spontaneous combustion, or, 
if an evaluation of the susceptibility of the coal seam to spontaneous 
combustion leads to a mine operator determination that a bleeder system 
should not be used. In these cases the approved ventilation plan must 
specify the methods that the operator will use to control spontaneous 
combustion, as well as accumulations of methane-air mixtures and other 
gases, dusts, and fumes in the worked-out area.
    During informational meetings and through the application of this 
standard, the Agency has become aware that the conditions under which 
air flow can be adjusted within a bleeder system is the subject of some 
concern. The following discussion is intended to address this concern 
and clarify the Agency's position. When adjustments to air flow in the 
bleeder entries are needed to assure proper functioning of the system, 
these adjustments would be made in accordance with Sec. 75.324, 
Intentional changes in the ventilation system. As explained in the 
preamble discussion of existing Sec. 75.324, when the adjustment in the 
bleeder system results in a change in direction of the air in the 
bleeder entry, this is a change in ventilation that could materially 
affect the safety or health of miners, and the precautions of 
Sec. 75.324 apply. As addressed under Sec. 75.324, other changes to air 
flow in the bleeder entry may also materially affect the safety or 
health of miners, and the precautions of Sec. 75.324 would apply. 
However, it is not intended that each and every change to bleeder 
ventilation be considered to materially affect the safety or health of 
miners. For example, minor changes needed to correct a localized 
condition, such as removing a methane accumulation in a high spot, may 
be possible. The operator must evaluate each change prior to its 
implementation and, if doubt exists as to whether the change is 
material, safety dictates that the change be treated as a material 
change and the provisions of Sec. 75.324 be followed.
Section 75.340  Underground Electrical Installations
    MSHA proposes to revise paragraph (a) of existing Sec. 75.340 for 
the purpose of clarifying the standard and to add requirements that a 
visual and audible alarm be provided on installations utilizing 
automatically activated doors and that, for installations equipped with 
sensors, monitoring of intake air ventilating battery charging stations 
be done with sensors not affected by hydrogen. For clarity, 
requirements for underground electrical installations to be in either 
noncombustible structures or areas or to have fire suppression systems 
have been put into separate paragraphs. Paragraph (a)(1) sets out the 
requirements that apply when a noncombustible structure or area is used 
for underground electrical installations. Similarly, paragraph (a)(2) 
sets out the requirements that apply when a fire suppression system is 
used. A provision has been added to proposed paragraph (a)(1)(iii) that 
requires that electrical installations be equipped with a device to 
activate a visual and audible alarm located outside of the enclosure on 
the intake side of the installation. In addition, to maintain 
consistency with proposed paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) and (a)(2)(ii) of this 
section, proposed paragraph (a)(1)(iii) would be revised to include the 
provision that monitoring of intake air ventilating battery charging 
stations be done with sensors not affected by hydrogen. Proposed 
paragraph (a)(1)(iii) addresses installations which are ventilated with 
intake air and equipped with sensors to monitor for heat and for carbon 
monoxide or smoke for the purpose of activating and automatically 
closing doors. The device would activate when the temperature reaches 
165 degrees Fahrenheit or the carbon monoxide concentration reaches 10 
parts per million above the ambient level for the area, or the optical 
density of smoke reaches 0.05 per meter. The visual and audible alarm 
required should be situated so that it can be seen or heard by persons 
traveling in the intake entry immediately adjacent to the installation. 
It was suggested to the Agency that these electrical installations may 
be susceptible to fire and the fire could go undetected. The visual and 
audible alarms would provide additional safety at these installations.
Section 75.342  Methane Monitors
    Informational meetings, later discussions on the rule, and recent 
experience have indicated that simply requiring methane monitors to be 
maintained in permissible condition does not completely satisfy the 
need for assuring proper maintenance. It was suggested that it is 
necessary to have a requirement that a trained person perform 
maintenance to preclude the possibility that a person with less than 
the necessary understanding of the monitor and the permissibility 
requirements would be assigned the task. Under the proposal, methane 
monitors must be properly maintained at all times. Like the existing 
rule, proposed paragraph (a)(4) would require that each methane monitor 
be calibrated with a known air-methane mixture at least every 31 days. 
The Agency would expect that, when necessary to maintain 
permissibility, methane monitors would be calibrated more frequently. 
To assure the appropriate level of maintenance, paragraph (a)(4)(i) 
would require that this maintenance be done by a trained person. To 
further assure the adequacy of the maintenance provided, paragraph 
(a)(4)(ii) would require, similar to the previous standard, the 
operator to develop and adopt a written maintenance program, a copy of 
which would be made available for review by authorized representatives 
of the Secretary and the representative of miners. The investigation 
into the recent explosion at the No. 3 Mine, Southmountain Coal 
Company, Inc., illustrates the importance of proper maintenance of 
methane monitors and the need for assuring that maintenance and 
calibration are being done properly. Although the Southmountain 
investigation report did not conclude that the methane monitor on the 
continuous mining machine was involved in the explosion, it did state 
that, ``* * * the methane monitor was likely in a condition that would 
not have allowed for accurate atmospheric monitoring of the area prior 
to and at the time of the explosion * * *.'' Appendix H of the report 
states, ``The methane monitor was not maintained as approved due to the 
use of a rag in place of the sintered metal screen filter in the dust 
guard. The methane monitor was not properly calibrated, as received. If 
this condition existed at the time of the explosion, the methane 
monitor would not have been able to accurately detect the presence of 
methane.'' The Agency believes that the best way to assure that 
maintenance and calibration are properly done is through a written 
maintenance program with which everyone involved is familiar.
    The Agency would expect that, at a minimum, the maintenance program 
would include the following: (1) Checks to assure that all components 
of the methane monitor are securely attached to the machine on which it 
is mounted and that all packing glands are properly packed and secured; 
(2) Checks to assure that the sensor head is installed as close to the 
face end of the machine as practicable and that the vent holes and 
filter(s) on the sensor head are not clogged with water, dust, or other 
material; and (3) Checks to assure that the warning device can be seen 
or heard by the machine operator at all locations from which the 
machine is operated and that the lens(es) protecting the meter and 
indicating lamps is not cracked or broken. The maintenance program 
should also make provisions to assure that the methane monitor meter or 
readout assembly is properly adjusted to indicate zero percent methane 
when no methane is present and that it is not possible to defeat the 
monitor by holding or blocking the machine's reset switch in the start 
position. The program should also specify the procedure for assuring 
that a warning is given when 1 percent methane is indicated on the 
meter or readout assembly and that all motors and lights on the machine 
are automatically deenergized when 2 percent methane is indicated on 
the meter or readout assembly.
    During informational meetings and subsequent discussions, MSHA 
heard suggestions that without a requirement for a record to be 
maintained of calibration tests, similar to that required by the 
previous regulation, there would be no way for the Agency or miners to 
verify that the tests were made. Upon reconsideration, and in light of 
the Southmountain explosion investigation, MSHA agrees that records of 
calibration tests would be beneficial and is therefore proposing, in 
paragraph (a)(4)(iii), that a record of all calibration tests be kept 
in a book maintained for this purpose on the surface at the mine. Like 
other records required by this proposal, the records of methane monitor 
calibration tests are to be made in a state-approved book or in a bound 
book with sequential machine-numbered pages. This is being proposed to 
reduce the likelihood that pages or records could be lost or misplaced. 
Comments are solicited on the use of this type of recordkeeping book 
and on an alternative approach wherein the Agency would develop, in 
coordination with the states, books specific for the required records.
    Under paragraph (a)(4)(iv) of the proposal, the records would be 
required to be retained for at least 1 year at a surface location at 
the mine and be made available for inspection by representative of 
miners and by authorized representatives of the Secretary.
Section 75.344 Compressors
    This standard specifies requirements for compressors in underground 
coal mines. The proposal would revise paragraph (a)(1), redesignate 
existing (b)(2) as (b)(3) and add new (b)(2) and (e).
    Improperly used or maintained compressors can present a significant 
risk of fire. To minimize this hazard to miners, the existing 
regulation addresses the detection and suppression of compressor fires, 
and specifies installation and operation requirements for compressors. 
The Agency has stayed paragraph (a)(1) of Sec. 75.344 of the existing 
regulation, which requires all compressors to be located in 
noncombustible structures or areas. During the informational meetings, 
it was brought to MSHA's attention that in some instances requiring 
such a structure could present a fire hazard.
    The proposal recognizes in paragraph (a)(1) that it is possible to 
provide the desired level of protection by permitting compressors to be 
operated while attended, rather than requiring that they be located in 
noncombustible structures or areas. Commenters pointed out that 
requiring all compressors, including portable compressors, to be 
located in noncombustible structures or areas might result in a fire 
hazard. The primary hazard identified in these instances is the buildup 
of heat within the structure if sufficient ventilation for cooling is 
not provided. Another hazard identified during discussions on this 
section is potential delay in roof bolting during construction of a 
suitable structure or area for the compressor used for bolting. 
Recognizing these potential hazards, the proposal would require 
compressors to be located in noncombustible structures or areas, 
provided adequate ventilation is maintained for cooling or, as an 
alternative, would require compressors to operate while attended. If 
the compressor is operated while attended, it is the Agency's intention 
that the person be able to see the compressor and recognize a problem 
and is close enough to activate the required fire suppression system 
and assure that the compressor is deenergized or shut off. This would 
not preclude the individual from performing other duties, including 
those involving the use of the compressor. However, it would require 
that the individual be in close proximity to the compressor. The Agency 
solicits comments on whether the standard should specify a distance and 
what that appropriate distance would be. If a specific distance is 
recommended, the commenters should also provide the rationale for that 
distance.
    Regardless of whether the compressor is located in a noncombustible 
structure or area or operated while attended, existing paragraph (b)(1) 
requires that the compressor, if not ventilated with air coursed 
directly into a return air course or to the surface, be operated only 
while it can be seen by a person designated by the operator. The 
difference between proposed paragraph (a)(1), and the existing 
paragraph (b)(1) would be the distance the designated person could be 
from the compressor. Under proposed paragraph (a)(1) the designated 
person would be required to be close enough to activate the fire 
suppression system, to deenergize or shut off the compressor, and to 
see the compressor. Under paragraph (b)(1), the designated person need 
only be able to see the compressor.
    In response to comments, the Agency is proposing paragraph (b)(2), 
which provides additional flexibility for compressor installations 
while maintaining the same level of protection. Proposed paragraph 
(b)(2) would add an alternative that would apply to compressors located 
immediately adjacent to a return air course where a substantial 
pressure differential exists. This alternative would not be appropriate 
for applications near working sections where low ventilation pressure 
differentials exist.
    Substantial pressure differentials are necessary to provide the air 
velocities required to prevent smoke rollback.
    Under proposed (b)(2), a compressor could be situated adjacent to a 
return air course, between two permanent ventilation controls through 
which an air split would be maintained from a small diameter opening in 
the intake-side control to a larger diameter opening in the return-side 
control. In lieu of the intake-side ventilation control, a door may be 
constructed in accordance with Sec. 75.333 (d)(1) and (d)(2). Section 
75.333(d)(3), which requires doors to be constructed in pairs, would 
not apply in this case. The Agency intends that this door remain closed 
at all times while the compressor is operating. This door would provide 
easy access to the compressor. The Agency would continue the practice 
of accepting as doors the fire-resistant check curtains described by 
Steven J. Luzik in ``MSHA Develops New Fire-Resistant Check Curtains,'' 
Coal magazine, pages 102-104, June 1993. The ventilating air quantity 
must be adequate to provide the essential cooling of the compressor. 
The Agency expects operators to provide the air quantity necessary to 
assure that the maximum ambient operating temperature specified by the 
compressor's manufacturer is not exceeded. Similarly, any other 
ventilating or temperature parameters specified by the manufacturer 
would be considered in determining an adequate ventilating air 
quantity.
    In addition to an air quantity necessary to provide cooling, the 
air velocity through the intake-side opening would be required to be 
sufficient to prevent any air reversal or possible smoke rollback in 
the event of a compressor fire. In determining sufficient air 
velocities, the Agency has placed in the rulemaking record the 1977 
MESA Informational Report, Ventilation to Control the Smoke From a 
Fireproof Structure, (IR 1054). That report concludes that smoke 
rollback should not occur if the centerline velocity through the 
intake-side opening (not to exceed 16 x 24 inches) is at least 1,100 
feet per minute (fpm) and the discharge opening is not smaller than the 
intake opening with at least 10 feet between the ventilation controls. 
The report also indicates that the intake opening should be close to 
the floor and the discharge opening should be near the roof. The Agency 
solicits comments on whether the velocity and associated parameters 
outlined in IR 1054 are appropriate.
    The proposed paragraph (b)(2) alternative also requires sensors for 
heat or carbon monoxide or smoke to be installed between the two 
permanent ventilation controls. The sensors would be required to 
activate a visual and audible alarm located outside of the enclosure on 
the intake side when either condition specified in paragraph (b)(3) (i) 
or (ii) occurs. The visual alarm should be situated so that it can be 
seen by persons traveling in the intake entry immediately adjacent to 
the enclosure.
    Paragraph (e) of the proposal has been added in response to 
suggestions that compressors have an automatic shutdown feature that 
deenergizes or shuts off the compressor when the required fire 
suppression system is activated. The Agency recognizes that under 
Sec. 75.1107-4 automatic deenergization is required if the automatic 
fire suppression system is activated on unattended electrically powered 
compressors. However, paragraph (e) would clarify that automatic 
deenergization or shutdown is required for both attended and unattended 
electric and diesel powered compressors. This paragraph also would 
require the compressor to be automatically deenergized or shut off if 
one or more of the doors (required by paragraph (b)(3)) close. 
Historically, fires on compressors that continue to operate have 
resulted in oil being released, which has contributed to the severity 
of the fire. For this reason, the Agency believes that safety is best 
served by requiring compressors to be automatically deenergized or shut 
off when the fire suppression system is activated.
    It was suggested that the cutoff for application of Sec. 75.344 be 
changed from 5 horsepower for all compressors to 30 horsepower for 
reciprocating compressors and 5 horsepower for all other types of 
compressors. The rationale presented for this suggestion is that 
reciprocating compressors of up to 30 horsepower contain about the same 
amount of lubricating oil as a 5 horsepower oil-flooded rotary 
compressor. This suggestion is not adopted in the proposal because the 
Agency has information (Report No. 06-292-87 of the Industrial Safety 
Division, Pittsburgh Safety and Health Technology Center) that the 
predominant hazard for fire or explosion in reciprocating compressors 
is not the lubricating oil but rather the formation of carbonaceous 
deposits in the discharge system. A review of accident reports 
indicated that nine mine fires started in compressors between 1970 and 
1992. Two of these nine fires occurred in compressors of the type 
subject to a buildup of carbonaceous deposits. Although it is not known 
that this buildup was the cause of these fires and the compressors 
involved were larger than 30 HP, these fires are of concern to the 
Agency. The Agency solicits additional comments on the safety 
considerations associated with reciprocating compressors.
Section 75.360  Preshift Examination
    MSHA is proposing several modifications to the requirements in the 
existing Sec. 75.360, Preshift examinations. Paragraph (e) would be 
removed, existing paragraphs (f) through (h) would be redesignated as 
(e) through (g), paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (f) would be revised, 
and new paragraphs (b)(8) through (b)(10) would be added.
    The informational meetings and later discussions on the rule 
indicated some confusion over the application of preshift examination 
requirements to pumpers. The questions focused on the need to preshift 
examined areas of the mine where pumpers were scheduled to work or 
travel. In response to these questions, the Agency has reviewed its 
position on this issue and has determined that the interest of safety 
is best served by permitting pumpers to perform examinations for 
themselves, provided they are certified. The existing regulation 
requires that areas where pumpers are assigned to work or travel be 
preshift examined even if the pumper is certified. The proposal would 
modify Sec. 75.360 by requiring in proposed paragraphs (a)(1) and 
(a)(2) that certified pumpers perform these examinations if the area 
has not been preshift examined. However, if the pumper is not 
certified, the proposal would continue to require the areas where the 
pumper is assigned to work or travel to be preshift examined. Paragraph 
(a)(2) of the proposal would require that the pumper make a record by 
or at the end of the shift of all hazardous conditions found.
    As with other examinations required by this subpart, no one may 
accompany the pumper during this examination. If persons other than the 
certified pumper are scheduled to enter the area, a preshift 
examination is required. However, pumpers may conduct supplemental 
examinations in accordance with Sec. 75.361 for other persons, provided 
certified pumpers: (1) have been designated by the operator to conduct 
these examinations; (2) conduct these examinations within 3 hours prior 
to anyone's entering the area; and (3) conduct these examinations in 
areas where persons were not scheduled to work prior to the beginning 
of the preshift examination. The proposal would provide at least the 
same level of safety as the existing regulation because a complete 
examination by a certified person would still be required and the 
examination would be conducted closer to the time that miners would 
actually enter the area.
    Paragraph (b) is proposed for revision to address conditions to be 
checked by the preshift examiner. Under the existing rule, the preshift 
examiner is required to examine for hazardous conditions. The preamble 
to the existing rule states the Agency's position that ``Most `hazards' 
are violations of mandatory standards.'' (57 FR 20894, May 15, 1992.) 
It further states that requiring a preshift examiner to look for all 
violations could distract the examiner from the more important aspects 
of the examination and that a district manager could require the 
preshift examiner to include examination for other hazards. Upon 
reconsideration, the Agency is proposing that the preshift examination 
be expanded to include an examination for noncompliance with mandatory 
safety or health standards that could result in a hazardous condition, 
as well as other hazardous conditions. This proposal places the 
examiner and the operator in a proactive rather than a reactive role 
and therefore has the potential to enhance safety by identifying a 
condition before a hazard exists.
    Under proposed paragraph (b)(1), roadways, travelways and track 
haulageways where persons are scheduled to work or travel during the 
oncoming shift must be preshift examined. The proposal would clarify 
that the preshift examination includes travelways in addition to 
roadways and track haulageways. This is being proposed based on 
comments received that the terms ``roadways'' and ``track haulageways'' 
specifically refer to areas where mobile powered equipment is operated. 
The addition of the term travelways in the proposal would require areas 
where persons are scheduled to travel on foot to also be preshift 
examined since hazards may also exist in these areas. The remaining 
portion of the existing paragraph has been transferred to paragraph 
(b)(10).
    Proposed paragraph (b)(3) would require an examination for 
hazardous conditions and noncompliance with mandatory safety or health 
standards that could result in a hazardous condition, tests for oxygen 
deficiency and methane, and a determination if the air is moving in its 
proper direction on any section that is not scheduled to operate but is 
capable of producing coal by simply energizing equipment. This is in 
addition to the existing requirement that these examinations and tests 
be made on working sections and areas where mechanized mining equipment 
is being installed or removed. It has been the Agency's position that 
sections that are capable of producing coal by simply energizing 
equipment should be examined in accordance with Sec. 75.361, 
Supplemental examinations. However, as pointed out by commenters, a 
number of fatalities have been the result of persons being sent into 
areas that should have been examined but were not. Because there is a 
reasonable likelihood that miners will at some point during a working 
shift enter sections that are set up to mine coal, the Agency is 
proposing that these sections be preshift examined.
    The Agency has become aware of an opinion of a segment of the 
mining community that those parts of Sec. 75.360 related to areas where 
mechanized mining equipment is being installed or removed were 
promulgated without the benefit of adequate comment. Although the 
Agency believes that the promulgation of this standard was done 
appropriately, it is being reproposed for the purposes of receiving and 
giving consideration to all pertinent comments.
    As stated in the preamble to the existing rule, ``The Agency has 
always considered these areas to be subject to the requirements of the 
preshift examination; however, an investigation following an explosion 
at the William Station Mine indicated that some confusion existed on 
this issue.'' (57 FR 20894, May 15, 1992.) The Agency's position on 
this issue remains unchanged at this time; however, comments are 
specifically solicited relative to the need to preshift examine these 
areas.
    Paragraph (b)(3) would also require the examination to include a 
test of the roof, face and rib conditions on these sections or in these 
areas. This is to clarify the Agency's position that failures of the 
roof, face and rib pose a hazard to miners. It has been suggested to 
the Agency that specifically requiring this examination is proactive 
rather than reactive and is therefore the preferred approach. The 
Agency has reconsidered its approach and agrees.
    Existing paragraph (b)(4) requires that a preshift examination of 
the approaches to worked-out areas along intake air courses be 
conducted if intake air passes by the worked-out area to ventilate 
working sections where anyone is scheduled to work during the oncoming 
shift. The proposal would revise paragraph (b)(4) by also requiring 
that the entries used to carry air into these worked-out areas be 
preshift examined. Under the provisions of existing Sec. 75.332(a)(1), 
air that ventilates a working section or an area where mechanized 
mining equipment is being installed or removed must be a separate split 
of intake air. Air that ventilates a worked-out area is return air and 
cannot be used. The preshift examination required by proposed paragraph 
(b)(4) is intended to assure that miners are not exposed to the hazards 
associated with ventilating working sections with return air and that 
air that enters a worked-out area in one entry does not reenter the 
intake air course. Additionally, the proposal would clarify the 
Agency's intent that the examination of the approaches to these worked-
out areas be made immediately inby and outby each entry used to carry 
air into the worked-out area.
    Paragraph (b)(6) of the proposal addresses concerns raised during 
the informational meetings and later discussions on the rule that 
requiring examination or rehabilitation of rooms and entries described 
in paragraphs (i) and (ii) could constitute a hazard. The existing 
standard requires a preshift examination of entries and rooms driven 
more than 20 feet off an intake air course without a crosscut or more 
than 2 crosscuts off an intake air course without permanent ventilation 
controls where intake air passes through or by these entries or rooms 
to a working section where anyone is scheduled to work during the 
oncoming shift. It was pointed out that often these rooms and entries 
have existed without incident for many years, which has allowed methane 
to bleed off. The Agency also heard assertions that as written the 
existing regulation may cause a diminution of safety to miners. It was 
stated that certain areas have been timbered heavily and cribbed 
because of adverse roof conditions and that rehabilitating such areas 
would unnecessarily expose workers removing or repositioning cribs to 
hazards. It was also stated that these areas are subject to roof falls 
and may remain prone to roof falls and hazardous conditions even after 
rehabilitation. Finally, it was stated that any advantages that come 
from physical inspection of these entries or rooms are outweighed by 
the danger to which the examiner may be exposed.
    In light of these concerns, the Agency has proposed that rooms and 
entries developed prior to November 15, 1992, need not be preshift 
examined and requests additional comment as to the impact on safety. 
Proposed paragraph (b)(6) requires that entries and rooms developed 
after November 15, 1992, either be preshift examined or ventilated 
using permanent ventilation controls.
    In response to comments, the Agency is proposing in paragraph 
(b)(8) that the preshift examiner check high spots along intake air 
courses where methane is likely to accumulate if equipment may be 
operated in the air course during the shift. It has long been 
recognized by the industry that methane can accumulate in high areas 
with no indication in the normal mine entry. As equipment passes under 
these areas, the methane is pulled down and mixed with the air in the 
entry and may be ignited by the equipment. Through proper ventilation 
and examination, this hazard can be eliminated.
    During informational meetings, commenters expressed concern about 
the potential fire and ignition hazards associated with electrical 
installations and compressors. Paragraph (b)(9) of the proposed rule 
would require that electrical installations referred to in 
Sec. 75.340(a), except for water pumps, and the areas where compressors 
subject to Sec. 75.344 are located, be preshift examined if the 
installation or compressor is or will be energized during the shift. 
Pumps would be exempted because of the limited hazard presented by 
pumps and because certified pumpers would conduct examinations for 
themselves in accordance with paragraph (a)(2) as they entered the area 
where the pump is located. The purpose of examining electrical 
installations and compressors would be to assure that methane in 
unacceptable concentrations is not present in these areas and that 
there are no signs of fire. The Agency solicits comments on this 
proposed requirement.
    In addition, the proposed rule would modify existing Sec. 75.360 to 
more clearly address those situations where miners are scheduled to 
work or travel after the preshift examination has begun. The proposal 
would amend paragraph (a), add a new paragraph (b)(10), and make a 
conforming editorial change to existing Sec. 75.360(b)(1). The existing 
Sec. 75.360(b)(1) requires that a preshift examination include areas 
where miners are scheduled to work or travel during the oncoming shift. 
The proposal reflects the fact that on occasion miners may be given 
their work assignments, and thus be scheduled to work or travel in an 
area, after the preshift examination has begun. This may occur, for 
example, due to changing conditions in the mine. In these cases the 
supplemental examination, rather than the preshift examination, would 
be required. In accordance with provisions of Sec. 75.361, a certified 
person must perform an examination of any area where a preshift 
examination was not made before any person enters the area. To permit 
these areas to be examined other than on the preshift examination 
maintains the existing level of safety because a complete examination 
by a certified person would be required. The examination would be 
conducted closer to the time that persons will actually enter the area, 
and any area where a hazardous condition exists will be posted.
    Consistent with the proposed change to paragraph (b)(3) requiring a 
preshift examination on any section that is not scheduled to operate 
but is capable of producing coal by simply energizing equipment, 
proposed paragraph (c) would require the preshift examination to 
include air measurements in these areas. Adequate ventilation is the 
primary means for assuring that methane does not accumulate in these 
areas, and therefore it is necessary to determine that an adequate 
volume of air is present. As stated previously, because there is a 
reasonable likelihood that miners will enter sections that are set up 
to mine coal at some point during a working shift, the Agency is 
proposing that these sections be preshift examined and that this 
examination include the air measurements described in proposed 
paragraph (c).
    Requirements for the posting of hazardous conditions found during 
the preshift examination are specified in existing paragraph (e) of 
Sec. 75.360. They would be transferred to Sec. 75.363. Additionally, 
under the requirements of proposed Sec. 75.363(a), hazardous conditions 
found by the preshift examiner or the pumper would have to be corrected 
immediately. Also, if these conditions create an imminent danger, 
everyone except those persons referred to in section 104(c) of The 
Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (the Act) must be withdrawn 
from the area affected to a safe area until the hazardous condition is 
corrected. Only persons designated by the operator to correct or 
evaluate the conditions would be permitted to enter the posted area. 
The requirement that the hazardous condition be corrected immediately 
is not intended to require correction by the preshift examiner. To do 
so would delay the completion of the preshift examination. Rather, it 
is intended that the condition be corrected immediately following its 
reporting by the preshift examiner. Under the proposal the area would 
be posted and would remain posted until the hazardous condition is 
corrected.
    The existing paragraph (g) that addresses the record that must be 
made of the preshift examination would be redesignated as paragraph 
(f). Commenters felt that the requirement left no latitude for 
recording findings of the examiner other than those listed. The 
preamble to the existing rule states that the reason for revising 
recordkeeping requirements was to ``* * * lessen paperwork burden 
without lessening the protection provided miners.'' This has not 
changed. However, commenters indicated that by not permitting examiners 
to record the results of their examinations, the protection afforded 
miners could be lessened. In response to these comments, the Agency is 
proposing to modify existing paragraph (g) by reinstating a previous 
requirement that examiners record the results of the examination. This 
would include hazardous conditions and their locations and the results 
and locations of air and methane measurements. This is intended to 
require the preshift examiner to record noncompliance with mandatory 
standards that could result in a hazard and observations made during 
the examination, such as changes in water levels, which, if left 
unattended, could block ventilation, resulting in a hazard to miners.
    The proposal would also clarify that the examiner must record the 
results of methane tests in terms of the percentage of methane found, 
as opposed to being characterized by terms such as ``trace.'' Recording 
a percentage would provide more precise information for the reviewing 
officials. The Agency solicits comments on this approach to recording 
the results of preshift examinations.
    Additionally, proposed paragraph (f) would require that a record be 
made of the action taken to correct hazardous conditions found during 
the preshift examination. Knowledge by mine management of the action 
necessary to correct a hazardous condition is important for the proper 
evaluation of the effectiveness of various actions. For example, if a 
hazardous condition occurs repeatedly and the action taken to correct 
it is the same each time, management should consider the effectiveness 
of the corrective action being taken. This requirement is consistent 
with recordkeeping requirements found in Sec. 75.363 and Sec. 75.364.
    Following publication of the final ventilation rule in May 1992, 
comments received by the Agency indicated that a change was perceived 
in the requirement for ``prompt'' countersigning by the mine foreman 
or, in the absence of the mine foreman, by the person designated to 
perform the duties of the mine foreman. The final rule did not include 
the previous requirement that the mine foreman must countersign the 
report ``promptly.'' Although no change was intended by the Agency, 
MSHA is proposing in paragraph (f) that the preshift examination report 
be countersigned by the mine foreman by the end of the mine foreman's 
next scheduled working shift. The Agency intends that the mine foreman, 
the person most responsible for the day-to-day operation of the mine, 
be notified of the information contained in the reports. Allowing until 
the end of the mine foreman's next regularly scheduled working shift to 
countersign the report would assure that the mine foreman is aware of 
the results of all preshift examinations and can implement necessary 
corrective actions in a timely manner.
    The proposal would also require that within two scheduled 
production days after the mine foreman has countersigned, the record of 
the examination be countersigned by the mine superintendent, mine 
manager, or other mine official to whom the mine foreman is directly 
accountable. This would be similar to the requirement of the previous 
regulation that the superintendent countersign records of the preshift 
examination. The preamble to the existing standard discusses removing 
the countersigning requirement by the superintendent on the basis that 
the superintendent, in many cases, is not a certified person and the 
mine foreman is given responsibility for countersigning because the 
mine foreman is the person most knowledgeable of the day-to-day 
operation of the mine. Countersigning by the mine foreman was retained. 
However, as indicated during informational meetings and subsequent 
discussion, the mine foreman is not necessarily the person in a 
position to redirect resources to address the safety concern. After 
reconsidering the existing language, the Agency is proposing to require 
countersigning by the mine foreman and by the superintendent, mine 
manager, or other official to whom the mine foreman is accountable, to 
assure that a higher level official, empowered to redirect resources, 
is aware of any condition requiring corrective actions. Since this 
second level official may not be physically located at the mine on a 
full-time basis, a period of two scheduled production days is proposed 
as a reasonable period of time for countersigning. The Agency solicits 
comments on this approach to countersigning the report of the preshift 
examination.
    The proposal would require that the record be made in a state-
approved book or in a bound book with sequential machine-numbered 
pages. Comments are solicited on this approach and on an alternative 
approach wherein the Agency would develop, in coordination with the 
states, books specific for the required records.
    Identical provisions to those proposed in paragraph (f) of 
Sec. 75.360 for countersigning records and for keeping the records in a 
state-approved book or in a bound book with sequential machine-numbered 
pages appear in Sec. 75.363(c) and Sec. 75.364(h).
Section 75.362  On-shift Examination
    MSHA is proposing to redesignate existing (d)(1)(i) and (ii) as 
(d)(1)(ii) and (iii), revise paragraphs (a)(1), (c)(1), (d)(1)(iii) and 
(d)(2), remove paragraph (a)(2), and add new paragraph (a)(2) and 
(d)(1)(i). MSHA also proposes to transfer the paragraphs (g) and (h) 
recordkeeping and retention requirements to Sec. 75.363, Hazardous 
conditions, posting, correcting, and recording, and add a new paragraph 
(g).
    Paragraph (a) would be modified in paragraph (a)(1) to require a 
certified person to conduct an on-shift examination of a section during 
any shift when anyone is assigned to work on the section and where 
mechanized mining equipment is being installed or removed. The existing 
rule requires that an on-shift examination be performed only on 
sections where coal is produced and where mechanized mining equipment 
is being installed or removed. The Agency agrees with comments received 
during informational meetings that many of the same hazards can exist 
for persons working on a section, regardless of whether coal is being 
produced. For example, many times miners are assigned to perform 
maintenance work on a section when no production is scheduled. This 
maintenance work can involve disabled equipment that cannot be moved 
from the face area or from an area near a pillar line. In these 
situations, hazards can be equivalent to those encountered by miners 
during normal coal-producing operations or similar operations on the 
section.
    The Agency proposes to revise paragraph (a) to incorporate the word 
``on-shift'' in the first sentence of the paragraph. The word ``on-
shift'' was inserted for clarification and consistency with other 
paragraphs of Sec. 75.362. The Agency is also proposing to revise 
paragraph (a)(1) to clarify that sufficient on-shift examinations be 
conducted to assure safety. It was suggested to the Agency that MSHA 
should include language to require more than one examination if 
necessary for safety, as provided for in the previous standard. The 
Agency is adopting this approach and is proposing that at least once 
during each shift, or more often if necessary for safety, a certified 
person designated by the operator would be required to conduct an on-
shift examination of each section where anyone is assigned to work 
during the shift and any area where mechanized mining equipment is 
being installed or removed during the shift.
    The Agency has become aware of an opinion of a segment of the 
mining community that language in paragraphs (a)(1), (c)(1) and (c)(2) 
requiring an on-shift examination of areas where mechanized mining 
equipment is being installed or removed was promulgated without the 
benefit of adequate comment. Although the Agency believes that the 
promulgation of this standard was done appropriately, these paragraphs 
are being reproposed for the purposes of receiving and giving 
consideration to all pertinent comments. The word ``working'' is 
removed from (c)(1) to assure the application of the standard would 
extend to all sections.
    The Agency has determined that a specific examination requirement 
should be added to assure compliance with the respirable dust control 
parameters designated in the mine ventilation plan. Assuring full 
compliance with these parameters is important in safeguarding the 
health of the miners. Agency experience shows that needed attention has 
not always been given to the required respirable dust control 
parameters. Citations issued by the Agency during a special spot 
inspection program, undertaken in 1991 at the request of MSHA's Coal 
Mine Respirable Dust Task Group, in which Agency inspectors conducted 
several checks of the dust control parameters during the course of each 
sampling shift, revealed that 21 percent of the 781 mining units 
sampled were not complying with one or more of the parameters. In its 
1992 report, the Agency's Task Group recommended that MSHA ``* * * 
require coal mine operators to make periodic on-shift examinations to 
verify that the ventilation plan parameters are in place and 
functioning as intended'' (p. 47). The Agency agrees and considers on-
shift examinations of dust control parameters an important part of 
reasonable and prudent dust control strategy.
    Thus the proposal, in paragraph (a)(2), would add a new on-shift 
examination requirement to address respirable dust control. Under the 
proposal, at or near the beginning of any shift before coal production 
begins on a section, a certified person designated by the operator 
would conduct an examination for compliance with the dust control 
parameters established in the mine ventilation plan. Corrective actions 
to assure compliance would be required to begin immediately. The 
proposed examination would include measurements for compliance with 
required water pressures and flow rates, number and orientation of 
water sprays, air quantities and velocities, section ventilation setup 
and control device placement, and any other dust control parameter 
required in the ventilation plan.
    Several methods of measuring water spray pressures would be 
acceptable. For example, water flow and pressure can be monitored 
through the installation of an in-line water meter and a pressure 
transducer. Water pressure can also be measured by permanently 
installing a pressure gauge on a machine. Operators would determine the 
working relationship between the pressure gauge reading and the actual 
operating pressure at the sprays. Once the working relationship has 
been established, the gauge pressure could be used to indicate the 
actual spray pressure specified in the ventilation plan for a given 
number of operating sprays.
    Measurement of any required water flow rate could be accomplished 
through the installation of a flowmeter. A flowmeter provides a direct 
and reliable measurement and is the preferred method of determining 
water flow rate. Another acceptable method of determining flow rate 
would be to establish the relationship between the water pressure and 
the spray orifice diameter, either through engineering data or through 
actual tests. Once established, the water pressure gauge reading could 
be used to reliably indicate a flow rate for a specific number of 
sprays at a given orifice size.
    The proposed requirement would specify that the number of water 
sprays and their orientation be included in the examination. While 
spray orientation is important in air-directing spray systems such as 
sprayfans and shearer-clearers, the Agency does not intend that precise 
angles be determined during each examination by the use of engineering 
instruments. Rather, the correct direction and orientation of the 
sprays would be determined by comparison with the requirements of the 
ventilation plan.
    The proposed requirement would also specify that the section 
ventilation setup and control device placement be examined for 
compliance with the ventilation plan. Information concerning section 
ventilation systems is currently required to be contained in the 
ventilation plan through Sec. 75.371(f). Any other respirable dust 
control parameters specified in the approved ventilation plan would be 
included in the examination under the proposal. An example could be the 
cleaning and maintenance procedures for a wet bed scrubber installed on 
a continuous mining machine.
    Given the importance of and the need for continually maintaining 
compliance with the dust control parameters to assure dust control, 
dilution and removal, an effective system of continuous monitoring of 
the performance and condition of the dust control parameters is 
desirable. The Agency is aware that through advances in technology it 
may be feasible to monitor air quantity and velocity, and spray water 
flow rate and pressure. Continuous monitoring offers the potential to 
further improve miner protection by providing real-time data on the 
performance and condition of the dust control parameters. This 
information can be used to give early warnings of deteriorating dust 
control conditions which can be corrected before the dust control 
system operates below the accepted standard. Although the application 
of continuous monitoring will eliminate the need for periodic physical 
measurements of key dust control parameters, visual observation will be 
necessary to verify compliance with other ventilation plan parameters. 
Among these are the number and location of operating water sprays, 
their general condition and orientation, the section ventilation setup 
and control device placement, and other control measures where 
performance and operating condition can only be assessed visually.
    Although the proposal includes continuous monitoring as an option, 
the Agency is considering requiring the use of this technology at some 
later date when it becomes available. Comments are solicited on this 
approach. Specifically, comments are solicited on the parameters that 
lend themselves to continuous monitoring, the need for performance 
standards for monitoring devices, levels of detection, accuracy and 
precision requirements for monitoring devices, the need for alarms and/
or warning signals when parameters monitored are outside of specified 
tolerances, and the polling frequency necessary to provide monitoring 
that is substantially continuous.
    Paragraph (c)(1) would be modified to remove the word ``working'' 
modifying the word ``section'' in the current rule. The reason for this 
proposed change is to achieve consistency between paragraphs (a) and 
(c). Many of the activities to which persons are assigned would be on 
sections not normally thought of as working sections, since the term 
``working section'' is often associated with coal production. For 
purposes of Sec. 75.362, a section in the mine is considered to be the 
area inby the loading point, or the proposed loading point in the case 
of the installation of equipment, or the location of the last 
established loading point in the case of the removal of mechanized 
mining equipment. The certified person conducting the examination would 
examine the section in much the same way as it would be examined during 
a coal producing shift, including checking for hazardous conditions, 
testing for methane and oxygen deficiency, and determining if the air 
is moving in its proper direction.
    Paragraph (c) would require certified persons conducting on-shift 
examinations to take the air measurements at the same locations where 
air measurements are required during the preshift examination. This 
would include areas where mechanized mining equipment, including 
longwall or shortwall mining equipment, is being installed or removed. 
This provides an additional check of the mine's ventilation system and 
verifies that ventilation changes in the mine during the production 
process have not occurred. Reduced volume or velocity of air during the 
shift can contribute to increased levels of respirable dust and the 
occurrence of methane accumulations or oxygen-deficient atmospheres.
    The proposal includes an additional requirement under paragraph 
(d)(1). The new item appears as (i) while former (i) and (ii) are 
redesignated as (ii) and (iii). Paragraph (i) would require that at the 
start of each shift an examination for methane be conducted at each 
working place before electrically operated equipment is energized on 
the section. Under the proposal, at the beginning of each shift, a 
methane examination would be conducted at each working place prior to 
energizing equipment. The provision would assure that the working 
places on the section are examined and determined to be safe before 
electrically operated equipment on the section is energized and normal 
work activities commence. The operation of electrically powered 
equipment is a recognized potential methane ignition source. The 
proposed rule would reduce the likelihood of ignition by requiring an 
examination for methane before this equipment is energized.
    The Agency is also proposing to revise paragraph (d)(1)(iii) to 
require methane tests more often than at the current 20-minute 
intervals at specific locations during the operation of equipment in 
the working place when required in the approved ventilation plan. 
Commenters have expressed a concern that some mines, because of the 
methane liberation at the face during mining operations, need 
additional methane tests for safety. MSHA agrees and is proposing to 
reinsert language similar to that in the previous standard that would 
require that when necessary for safety, more frequent tests are to be 
made. It should be noted that the methane monitor installed as required 
by Sec. 75.342, Methane monitors, has never been accepted as a means 
for satisfying the test requirements of this section, and likewise 
would not be accepted under the proposed rule.
    It is proposed to modify paragraph (d)(2) to require that methane 
tests be made at the face of each working place using extendable probes 
or other acceptable means. The existing standard requires that these 
tests be made at the last row of permanent roof support, unless tests 
are required to be made closer to the working face using extendable 
probes. The previous standard, like the proposal, required these tests 
to be made at the face. However, it should be noted that it was a 
common practice at one time for miners to set temporary support in 
order to proceed inby permanent support to make methane tests. Given 
the hazards associated with advancing inby permanent support for any 
reason, the Agency prohibited this practice in the mid 1980's. The use 
of probes would permit methane tests at the face while continuing the 
Agency's policy of prohibiting a person going inby the last permanent 
roof support to conduct a methane test. Comments received during 
informational meetings with the mining community stressed the need for 
methane tests to be conducted at the face during any mining operation. 
MSHA agrees that proper testing for methane at the face is essential 
for safe mining operations. Commenters questioned whether methane tests 
were being conducted adequately during deep cut operations. Some of the 
extended cuts currently being taken are up to 40 feet inby the last row 
of permanent roof supports. However, the Agency knows of no 
commercially available probe greater than 30 feet in length. In 
proposing the use of extendable probes or other acceptable means to 
test for methane during deep cut operations, MSHA realizes that the 
provision is technology forcing. By requiring methane tests at the face 
without having miners go inby the last row of permanent roof support, 
it is the intent of the Agency to achieve the maximum safety feasible. 
It is not the intent of the Agency to prohibit extended or deep cuts 
that are consistent with technologically feasible safe mining 
practices. In the interim, the Agency is soliciting comments on 
alternative compliance measures that could be acceptable in lieu of an 
extendable probe. The other changes proposed in paragraph (d)(2) 
clarify the location and frequency of the methane tests.
    The proposal would transfer the existing recordkeeping and 
retention requirements under paragraphs (g) and (h) to Sec. 75.363 
Hazardous conditions, posting, correcting, and recording, and add a 
certification requirement under a new paragraph (g). The Agency 
received comments that without certification, no mechanism would exist 
to verify that examinations were conducted in belt conveyor entries. In 
response to these comments, proposed paragraph (g) would require, 
similar to a requirement of the previous standard, the on-shift 
examiner to certify by initials, date, and time that the belt conveyor 
entry was examined. The examiner would make this certification at a 
sufficient number of locations to indicate that the entire belt 
conveyor entry has been examined. This certification process is a 
common practice in the industry and is required by several state 
regulations.
Section 75.363  Hazardous Conditions; Posting, Correcting, and 
Recording
    Section 75.363 is a new provision included in the proposal in 
response to comments received by the Agency. The commenters stressed 
the importance of recording all hazardous conditions and questioned 
whether the existing standards require such a record in all cases. The 
Agency agrees that recording all hazardous conditions will result in a 
safety benefit by assuring notification of the mine foremen and 
certified persons who may be required to enter the areas to conduct the 
examinations. This would enable the examiner to double-check, during 
subsequent examinations, the areas where problems have occurred. The 
proposal would not require a record to be made for those shifts during 
which no hazardous conditions were found.
    Proposed Sec. 75.363 is intended to apply to all hazardous 
conditions except for the recording of hazardous conditions discovered 
during preshift and weekly examinations governed by Secs. 75.360 and 
75.364, respectively and the action taken to correct these conditions. 
Section 75.363 would also apply to hazardous conditions found during 
the supplemental examination, examinations conducted by pumpers for 
themselves, and the on-shift examination, as well as any other 
hazardous condition. The proposal recognizes that the existing rule 
already requires the recording of hazardous conditions found during 
preshift and weekly examinations. Records completed in accordance with 
Secs. 75.360 or 75.364 need not be duplicated in the Sec. 75.363 
records. The Agency believes that records of hazardous conditions 
discovered during these examinations would be more appropriately kept 
in the books maintained exclusively for those examination results and 
that no purpose would be served by duplicating those records.
    Paragraph (a) would require any area where a hazardous condition is 
found by or reported to the mine foreman, assistants to the mine 
foreman, or other certified persons designated by the operator to make 
examinations, to be posted against entry with a conspicuous danger 
sign. The danger sign would be placed at a location where anyone 
entering the area of the hazardous condition would pass so that persons 
approaching the area would be expected to see the danger sign. The 
posting of areas where hazardous conditions exist to alert persons is 
an accepted safety practice in the mining community. The area would 
remain posted until the hazardous conditions are corrected. As with the 
existing requirement in Sec. 75.364, Weekly examination, paragraph (a) 
of the proposal would require that hazardous conditions be corrected 
immediately and that only persons designated by the operator to correct 
or evaluate the condition may enter a posted area. Additionally, if the 
hazardous condition creates an imminent danger, everyone must be 
withdrawn from the affected area to a safe area until the condition is 
corrected. Persons referred to in section 104(c) of the Act are 
permitted to remain in the area.
    Paragraph (b) of the proposal would require that once a hazardous 
condition is found, a record would be required to be kept in a book 
maintained for this purpose on the surface at the mine. A description 
of the hazardous condition, its location, and actions taken to correct 
the condition would be recorded. So as to make the information 
concerning hazardous conditions available to oncoming shifts, the 
proposal would require the record to be entered in the book by or at 
the end of the shift in which the hazardous condition was discovered. 
As explained in the preamble to the existing rule, commenters stated 
that a record of all hazards found during the examination is necessary 
to enable the examiner to double-check, during subsequent examinations, 
areas where problems have occurred. The Agency agrees with this 
position and therefore, consistent with the requirements of 
Sec. 75.360, is proposing in paragraph (b) that a record be made of any 
hazardous condition found by or reported to the mine foreman, 
assistants to the mine foreman, or other certified person designated by 
the operator to conduct examinations under this subpart D. 
Additionally, knowledge by mine management of the action necessary to 
correct a hazardous condition is important for the proper evaluation of 
the effectiveness of various actions. For example, if a hazardous 
condition occurs repeatedly and the action taken to correct it is the 
same each time, management should reevaluate the effectiveness of the 
corrective action being taken. Therefore, the Agency is proposing in 
paragraph (b) that the record also include the action required to 
correct the hazardous condition. Paragraph (b) would not require a 
record of hazardous conditions found during preshift or weekly 
examinations, since the proposed regulations at Secs. 75.360(f) and 
75.364(h) would require records of hazardous conditions found during 
these examinations.
    To assure the accuracy and completeness of the record, paragraph 
(c) of the proposal would require that the record be made either by the 
certified person or by a person designated by the operator. As with 
other records required by this subpart, when the record is made by a 
designated person other than the certified person making the 
examination, the person making the record need not be certified. If the 
record is made by a person designated by the operator, the certified 
person would be required to verify the record by initials and date. 
Paragraph (c) of Sec. 75.363 would also include provisions identical to 
those proposed in paragraph (f) of Sec. 75.360 and paragraph (h) of 
Sec. 75.364 for countersigning records and for keeping the records in a 
state-approved book or in a bound book with sequential machine-numbered 
pages. As discussed above under the section-by-section discussion for 
Sec. 75.360(f), the requirements for countersigning would increase 
safety, particularly through increasing the awareness of the 
appropriate mine officials of the hazardous conditions requiring 
correction.
    Consistent with the requirements for the retention of records in 
the existing rule, paragraph (d) of the proposal would require the 
record to be retained for at least 1 year at a surface location at the 
mine and be made available for inspection by the representative of the 
miners and by authorized representatives of the Secretary. Records of 
examinations provide the operator and other interested parties with a 
history of the types of problems discovered and changes in the 
ventilation system that have occurred. In the opinion of the Agency, a 
1-year retention period is sufficient to satisfy this need.
Section 75.364  Weekly Examination
    MSHA proposes to revise paragraphs (a), (b) and (h) of existing 
Sec. 75.364. Paragraph (a) of the proposal would modify the 
requirements addressing the measurements to be made during the weekly 
examination to evaluate the effectiveness of bleeder systems and the 
ventilation of worked-out areas.
    Proposed paragraph (a)(1) would require that in addition to 
measuring the methane and oxygen concentrations and determining if the 
air is moving in its proper direction in worked-out areas where no 
pillars have been recovered, the examiner would measure the air 
quantity where the air enters and leaves the worked-out area. Paragraph 
(a)(1) would also clarify that sufficient oxygen and methane 
measurements be made to assure adequate air quality. Commenters 
suggested, and the Agency agrees, that all of these measurements, 
including quantity and quality, are essential to the proper evaluation 
of the ventilation of the worked-out area.
    Proposed paragraph (a)(2) would require that air quantity 
measurements be made at specific locations in bleeder entries. These 
locations include: where air enters the worked-out area, paragraph 
(a)(2)(i); where air leaves the worked-out area, paragraph (a)(2)(ii); 
and, locations specified in the mine ventilation plan to determine the 
effectiveness of the bleeder system, paragraph (a)(2)(iii). The 
proposed measurement of air quantity, as with the currently required 
measurement of methane and oxygen and determination that air is 
traveling in its proper direction, is essential to the proper 
evaluation of the effectiveness of a bleeder system.
    Proposed paragraph (a)(2)(iv) is intended to provide a mechanism 
for evaluating the effectiveness of bleeder systems without traveling 
the bleeder entries in their entirety. It is anticipated that this 
alternative will be utilized in those cases when travel is not possible 
or when it is not safe to travel the bleeder entries in their entirety. 
When elected, the method proposed for evaluation would be required to 
provide proper evaluation of the effectiveness of the bleeder system.
    The following discussion is intended to address comments received 
relative to weekly examinations for hazardous conditions to the area of 
deepest penetration in rooms where no pillars have been recovered.
    It is a common practice in the mining industry to develop rooms off 
of a set of advancing entries with the return-side rooms being mined on 
the advance and intake-side rooms being mined on retreat. Once each set 
of rooms is developed to the projected depth, mining is considered 
completed in that specific area. As each set of rooms is advanced, 
connections are normally made between the previously developed rooms 
and the set of rooms being advanced. The rooms are usually connected by 
crosscuts at the point of deepest penetration. Work in these rooms is 
discontinued as each set of rooms is completed, creating a worked-out 
area.
    Commenters have raised questions concerning the extent of the 
examination required in these sets of rooms once they are completed. 
Also, comments have suggested that in this mining scenario, the area 
may not be considered worked out until the final set of intake-side 
rooms is completed.
    The Agency considers rooms and sets of rooms where mining is 
completed to be worked-out areas. Therefore, a weekly examination for 
hazardous conditions by traveling to the area of deepest penetration of 
the rooms or set of rooms is required. The required examination 
includes measurements of oxygen and methane concentrations and tests to 
determine if the air is moving in its proper direction.
    If the rooms are connected from the first set of return rooms to 
the point of deepest penetration of the return rooms with no barriers 
providing separation, and similarly connected on the intake side, 
travel around the periphery of the rooms to the area of deepest 
penetration and conducting the required air and methane tests will 
satisfy the requirements of the section.
    As provided in existing Sec. 75.364(a)(1), an alternate method 
which provides effective evaluation of the area may be approved in the 
ventilation plan. However, approval of an alternate method in lieu of 
examination at the points of deepest penetration within a developed 
area would be unlikely unless the area were penetrated and ventilated 
by shafts, bleeder entries, or some other effective method of 
adequately evaluating ventilation of the area. Comments are 
specifically solicited on the issues discussed.
    It has been suggested to the Agency that the requirement to 
evaluate the effectiveness of bleeder systems under paragraph 
(a)(2)(iii) can be satisfied by simply traveling the bleeder entries. 
Since the purpose of traveling bleeder entries is to evaluate the 
effectiveness of the bleeder system, this cannot be accomplished by 
simply traveling the entries. It is inherent in the requirement that 
the entries be traveled that the examiner periodically stop at critical 
locations to make such tests and measurements as may be necessary to 
determine that the bleeder system is working effectively. It would 
serve no purpose to require that the entries be traveled without an 
evaluation of the system's effectiveness. Although the Agency believes 
that the rule accurately reflects this intent and is not proposing to 
change the standard at this time, comments are solicited on this issue. 
Specifically, the comments should address the need for specifying where 
tests and measurements should be made, the nature of these tests and 
measurements, and whether this information should be included in the 
ventilation plan.
    Paragraph (b) is proposed for revision to address conditions to be 
checked by the weekly examiner. Under the existing rule, the weekly 
examiner is required to examine for hazardous conditions. The preamble 
to the existing rule states the Agency's position that ``Most 'hazards' 
are violations of mandatory standards.'' As with the preshift examiner, 
requiring the weekly examiner to look for all violations could distract 
the examiner from the more important aspects of the examination. 
Nonetheless, the Agency feels there is merit in placing the examiner 
and the operator in a proactive rather than a reactive role in terms of 
identifying hazards. Consistent with proposed Sec. 75.360(b), the 
Agency is proposing that, similar to the previous standard, the weekly 
examination include an examination for hazardous conditions as well as 
noncompliance with mandatory safety or health standards that could 
result in a hazardous condition. The preamble to the existing rule 
states the Agency's position that ``* * * most hazardous conditions in 
a mine would result from a violation of a safety or health standard.'' 
(57 FR 20897, May 15, 1992.) It further states that requiring the 
examiner to look for all violations could distract the examiner from 
the more important aspects of the examination . Upon reconsideration, 
the Agency is proposing that the weekly examination be expanded to 
include an examination for noncompliance with mandatory safety or 
health standards that could result in a hazardous condition, as well as 
other hazardous conditions. This proposal places the examiner and the 
operator in a proactive rather than a reactive role and therefore has 
the potential to enhance safety by identifying a condition before a 
hazard exists.
    Paragraph (h) of the proposal would require that a record be made 
of the results of the weekly examination, including the results of air 
and methane measurements, either by the certified person or by a person 
designated by the operator. The proposal clarifies that the results of 
methane tests would be recorded as the percentage of methane measured 
by the examiner, as opposed to being characterized by terms such as 
``trace.'' Recording a percentage would provide more precise 
information for the reviewing officials. If the record is made by a 
person designated by the operator, the certified person would be 
required to verify the record by initials and date by or at the end of 
the shift for which the examination was made. Paragraph (h) of 
Sec. 75.364 would also include provisions identical to those proposed 
in paragraph (f) of Sec. 75.360 and paragraph (c) of Sec. 75.363 for 
countersigning records and for keeping the records in a state-approved 
book or in a bound book with sequential machine-numbered pages. As 
discussed above under the section-by-section discussion for Sec. 75.360 
(f), the requirements for countersigning would increase safety, 
particularly through increasing the awareness of the appropriate mine 
officials of the hazardous conditions requiring correction.
Section 75.370  Mine Ventilation Plan; Submission and Approval
    MSHA is proposing to revise portions of Sec. 75.370 to address 
comments received relative to the role of the representative of the 
miners in the ventilation plan approval process. Paragraph (a) would be 
revised by the proposal, paragraphs (b) and (e) would be revised and 
redesignated as paragraphs (c) and (f), a new paragraph (b) would be 
added, and other paragraphs would be redesignated as appropriate.
    One comment received was that the miners who work under the plan 
are often in the best position to know the effect of proposed 
revisions. The Agency has consistently recognized the importance of 
input from the miners' representative in all aspects of the plan-
approval process. This is clear in the preamble to the existing 
standard, which states:

    MSHA agrees with commenters that miners have a stake in the 
implementation of the ventilation plan at each mine. Recognizing 
this role and the importance of mine plans to an effective safety 
and health program, commenters noted that many operators provide 
miners with a copy of the proposed plan before it is submitted to 
MSHA for approval. The commenters also noted that some existing wage 
and hour agreements in the industry address this issue, and under 
these contracts miners have the right to review plan provisions 
before they are submitted to MSHA. Also, MSHA district managers meet 
with miners' representatives to discuss plan provisions upon request 
and have accepted written material the miners would like MSHA to 
consider while the plan is being reviewed. Related to this issue, 
miners have the right under Sec. 103(g) of the Act to request an 
inspection by MSHA of any alleged hazardous condition in the mine. 
Under the final rule, these practices and procedures will continue 
to involve miners' representatives in the development of meaningful 
and effective plans.

    MSHA recognizes that the operator has the legal responsibility for 
developing a ventilation plan. In that context, the Agency has 
reconsidered whether the role of the miners' representative in the 
plan-approval process should be formalized in this rule. To clarify the 
intent of the Agency and to assure that the miners' representative has 
an opportunity to comment on each proposed ventilation plan and 
revision submitted, the Agency is proposing several changes to the 
existing standard. As discussed in more detail below, the basic 
approach proposed is for the miners' representative to be given the 
opportunity to review proposed ventilation plans and revisions and 
submit comments to MSHA. MSHA would review the plan and consider all 
timely comments received in making its determination to approve or 
disapprove a proposed plan.
    Paragraph (a)(3)(i) of the proposal would require that at the time 
of submittal of a ventilation plan or a revision to an existing 
ventilation plan to the Agency by the operator, the operator would also 
be required to provide a copy of the plan or revision to the 
representative of miners. This requirement is intended to assure that 
the miners and their representative are promptly made aware of what is 
being submitted and are afforded time to comment. Additionally, the 
proposal would continue to require in paragraph (a)(3)(ii) that a copy 
of the proposed plan or any proposed revisions be made available for 
inspection by the representative of the miners. Although this proposal 
may appear superfluous in light of the proposed requirement in 
paragraph (a)(3)(i), it is the Agency's opinion that the review process 
and the submittal of comments in a timely manner are facilitated by 
requiring that the proposed plan or revision be made available for 
inspection by the representative of miners as well as providing the 
representative with a copy. Further, in those instances where a 
representative of miners has not been designated, it is necessary that 
miners have a copy of the plan available for inspection.
    Paragraph (a)(3)(iii) of the proposal retains the existing 
requirement that copies of the proposed plan and proposed revisions be 
posted on the mine bulletin board and clarifies that posting is 
required at the time of submittal. The Agency believes that the posting 
requirement is necessary to assure that all miners at a mine will have 
the opportunity to review the proposed plan or revision and provide 
input during the review process. The Agency solicits comments on this 
approach to providing miners with information relative to proposed 
ventilation plans and revisions.
    Paragraph (b) of the proposal specifies the means by which the 
representative of miners would have input to the review process. Under 
the proposal, the representative of miners may submit comments on the 
proposed plan or revision to the district manager for consideration. 
Recognizing that in some instances a decision relative to the approval 
or denial of a revision must be made in a short timeframe, the proposal 
would require that comments be made in a timely manner. The Agency does 
not define ``timely manner'' but would construe it to be a period of 
time that would not delay the approval process. Recognizing the 
importance of miners' input, the district manager will continue to be 
available to discuss with the representative of miners all aspects of 
the plan as they affect miners' health and safety following approval or 
denial of a proposed plan or revision. MSHA solicits comments on this 
approach.
    Paragraph (c)(1) of the proposed standard would continue the 
requirement of the existing regulation that the district manager notify 
the operator in writing of the approval or denial of a proposed plan or 
proposed revision. Additionally, it is proposed in paragraph (c)(1) 
that a copy of this notification be sent by the district manager to the 
representative of miners. This approach is being proposed to assure 
that the representative of miners is kept informed of the progress of 
the plan approval from submission to final action.
    In order to assure that the miners themselves, as well as the 
representative of miners, are aware of the provisions of the 
ventilation plan once it is approved, the proposal under paragraph 
(f)(1) would require that the operator provide the representative of 
miners with a copy of the plan or revision following notification of 
approval. Also, the proposal would continue in paragraphs (f)(2) and 
(f)(3) the existing requirements that the approved plan or revision be 
made available for inspection by the representative of miners and be 
posted on the mine bulletin board. Under a new requirement in proposed 
paragraph (f)(3), an approved plan or revision would be required to be 
posted within 1 working day of notification of the approval and would 
remain posted for the entire period that the plan is in effect.
Section 75.371  Mine Ventilation Plan; Contents
    The Agency proposes to revise paragraphs (b), (s), (z) and (bb) and 
to repropose paragraph (r) of this standard.
    The proposal would revise existing paragraph (b) to add language 
that reflects the proposed changes in paragraphs (c) and (d) of 
Sec. 75.312 allowing alternative testing methods for main mine fan 
automatic closing doors and fan signals. Paragraphs (c) and (d) of 
Sec. 75.312 would require that an operator wishing to use an 
alternative method to stopping the main mine fan have the alternative 
method approved in the ventilation plan.
    MSHA proposes to revise paragraph (s) to conform to proposed 
Sec. 75.362(d)(1)(iii). The proposal would delete the portion of 
existing Sec. 75.362(d)(2) requiring, in the approved ventilation plan, 
the location of tests which are to be made closer to the working face 
than the last permanent roof supports using extendable probes or other 
acceptable means. Proposed (d)(1)(iii) would require that the 
ventilation plan specify the frequency of the methane tests if required 
more often than 20 minutes by Sec. 75.362(d)(1)(iii). It would also 
require that the ventilation plan specify the location of these tests; 
e.g., ``in the working places on section MMU No. 123,'' or in ``the 
working places off first right off of east mains.''
    MSHA proposes to revise paragraph (z) to conform to proposed 
Sec. 75.364(a). Paragraph (a) of the proposed Sec. 75.364 would modify 
the requirements addressing the measurements to be made to evaluate the 
effectiveness of bleeder systems and the ventilation of worked-out 
areas during the weekly examination. The measurement of air quantity, 
as well as the other measurements required by the existing standard, 
are essential to the proper evaluation of the ventilation of the 
worked-out area and the effectiveness of bleeder systems. It is 
proposed that the locations where these measurements will be made or 
alternative methods of providing these evaluations be included in the 
ventilation plan.
    Existing paragraph (bb) requires that the location of ventilating 
devices used to control air movement through worked-out areas be 
included in the ventilation plan. The proposal would add a requirement 
contained in the previous regulation, that the location and sequence of 
construction of proposed seals also be indicated. Improper sequencing 
of seal construction can have a deleterious effect on mine air quality, 
and therefore the location and sequence of construction of these seals 
should be reviewed and approved as a part of the ventilation plan.
    Although the Agency believes that the promulgation of paragraph (r) 
of this standard was done appropriately, it is being reproposed for the 
purposes of receiving and giving consideration to all pertinent 
comments. Section 75.325(d), as reproposed, would require that areas 
where mechanized mining equipment, including longwall equipment, is 
being installed and removed be ventilated. Paragraph (r) of Sec. 75.371 
would require that the quantity of air that will be provided be 
included in the ventilation plan.
Section 75.372  Mine Ventilation Map
    The proposed paragraph (b)(3) would revise existing 
Sec. 75.372(b)(3) to assure that all known adjacent workings are shown 
on the mine map, regardless of whether they are located on mine 
property or on adjacent property. It would do so by deleting the phrase 
``on mine property'' from the existing standard. In response to 
comments received, the Agency has concluded that it would be 
inappropriate to exclude from the mine ventilation map all known 
workings located in the same coalbed within 1,000 feet of existing or 
projected workings simply because they are not located on the mine 
property. Safety benefits associated with the knowledge of nearby mine 
workings accrue, even when the nearby workings are not on the mine 
property. The Agency also notes that this revision would be consistent 
with existing paragraph (h) of Sec. 75.1200, Mine map. Paragraph (h) of 
Sec. 75.1200 requires that the mine map show all adjacent mine workings 
within 1,000 feet. Like the previous standard, this revision would 
assure that all adjacent mine workings appear on the Sec. 75.372 map in 
those cases where operators do not use a Sec. 75.1200 map for their 
required submission.
    In response to comments, the proposed paragraph (b)(19) would 
reinstate the requirement in the previous standard that the mine map 
include the entry height, velocity and direction of the air current at 
or near the midpoint of each belt flight where the height and width of 
the entry are representative of the belt haulage entry. The belt entry 
is required to be examined in accordance with subpart D. The proposal 
would assist the examiner in rapidly determining whether the air is 
flowing in its normal velocity and direction.
    As explained in the discussion of proposed Sec. 75.301, instances 
have developed where operators take air from an intake air course to 
ventilate shops, electrical installations, or for other purposes, and 
this air is then coursed to the surface and is not used to ventilate 
working places. Under one interpretation of the existing definition, 
because this air has not ventilated a working place or a worked-out 
area, the air course cannot be considered a return air course. In these 
instances, the proposal would expressly permit the redesignation of the 
affected portion of the air course as a return. Because it is important 
that personnel, including examiners, the miners' representative, and 
representatives of the Secretary, know which air courses have been 
redesignated, the proposal would require that they be shown on the map. 
The proposed paragraph (b)(20) would require that the designation and 
location of air courses that have been redesignated from intake to 
return for the purpose of ventilation of structures, areas or 
installations that are required by this subpart D to be ventilated to 
return air courses, and for ventilation of seals, be shown on the map.
Section 75.380  Escapeways; Bituminous and Lignite Mines
    This section would revise paragraph (f) and portions of paragraphs 
(d) and (i) and repropose paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2).
    Under the proposal, Sec. 75.380(d)(3) would provide that in areas 
of mines where escapeways pass through doors or in areas of mines 
developed before November 16, 1992, where escapeways pass across or 
under overcasts or undercasts, the height of the escapeway may be less 
than 5 feet provided the height is sufficient to enable miners, 
including disabled persons, to escape quickly in an emergency 
situation. It was brought to the attention of the Agency that in some 
instances the removal of roof support or the lowering of the tops of 
overcasts may be necessary to provide the 5-foot height required by the 
existing rule. It has been suggested that this could, in and of itself, 
result in a diminution of safety. Historically, the dimensions of 
escapeways were addressed through criteria. Some mine operators have 
requested and received approval for lesser dimensions than that in 
criteria based on a performance test referred to as a ``stretcher 
test.'' Under this test, 4 persons are required to carry a person on a 
stretcher through the area in question to demonstrate that the lesser 
dimension would not delay escape. The Agency would expect that when 
there is a need to determine whether sufficient height is provided, the 
stretcher test discussed above would be applied. Since the goal of the 
standard is to assure that the escape of miners is not impeded, the 
demonstration that there would be no delay assures that there is no 
reduction in safety when the proposed standard is compared to the 
existing standard.
    It was also suggested to the Agency that where escapeways developed 
on or after November 16, 1992, (the effective date of the existing 
rule) pass across or under overcasts or undercasts, the height of the 
escapeway should be permitted to be less than 5 feet provided the 
height is sufficient to enable miners, including disabled persons, to 
escape quickly in an emergency situation. The Agency has considered 
this suggestion but has adopted it because sufficient clearance should 
have been provided in these escapeways through proper planning and 
engineering.
    The Agency received questions during informational meetings 
regarding the need for minimum requirements for door height. The Agency 
has reviewed its position concerning door heights and is proposing in 
paragraph (d)(3) to permit door heights of less than 5 feet under 
certain conditions. Door heights of less than 5 feet would be permitted 
provided the operator demonstrates by the stretcher test described 
above that persons, including disabled persons, can escape without 
delay. Passing this test assures that there would be no diminution of 
safety under the new provision. Allowing heights less than 5 feet in 
these doors is not expected to result in a delay. Normally, there are 
few doors in an escapeway and the distance to be traversed in a door is 
short. Also, since significant pressure differentials can exist in 
escapeways, doors which are less than 5 feet would be easier to open.
    Paragraphs (d)(4)(i), and (ii) would be unchanged under the 
proposal, aside from editorial revisions. These paragraphs are retained 
to provide for situations where escapeways are permitted to be less 
than 6 feet in width.
    Paragraph (d)(4)(iii) of the proposal would apply to alternate 
escapeways only. As discussed above, paragraphs (d)(4)(i) and (ii) 
permit both escapeways to be less than 6 feet, but not less than 4 
feet, in width under certain conditions. Paragraph (d)(4)(iii) would 
permit widths less than 4 feet in alternate escapeways when conditions 
warrant and a test is conducted to demonstrate the adequacy of the 
width. The conditions that could warrant lesser widths would include 
the locations where the alternate escapeway passes through doors or 
other permanent ventilation controls or where supplemental roof support 
is required. The Agency would expect that when there is a need to 
determine whether adequate width is provided, the stretcher test 
discussed above would be applied. Under this provision, it is 
conceivable that escapeway widths less than 4 feet could be warranted 
by the conditions in the entry through which the escapeway is routed.
    The Agency has developed proposed paragraph (d)(4)(iii) based on 
comments received since May 1992 and on its own internal review. 
Previously, approval has been requested and granted for reduced 
horizontal escapeway widths using the above-described stretcher test. 
These approvals were based on the need to provide additional roof 
support and, in some cases, the need for passage through ventilation 
controls. Additionally, as newer portions of a mine age and may require 
additional roof support, the proposal would allow clearances of less 
than 4 feet in the alternate escapeway, provided the stretcher test is 
passed. The Agency solicits comments as to whether this proposed 
approach achieves the result of the standard while adequately 
addressing the safety issues of providing necessary supplemental roof 
support in the alternate escapeway. The Agency also solicits comments 
on whether the distance that the escapeway is permitted to be less than 
4 feet should be limited and if so, what the limit should be.
    Following the publication of the existing ventilation rule, some 
persons interpreted Sec. 75.380(d) to require the width of mobile 
equipment to be considered when determining compliance with width 
requirements for escapeways. It is not the Agency's intent that mobile 
equipment be considered in this determination unless the equipment has 
been permanently abandoned in the escapeway or would be obstructing the 
escapeway for a significant portion of a shift. As an example, where a 
track entry is used as the primary escapeway on a longwall section, 
material cars would not be permitted to obstruct the escapeway since 
the obstruction would exist for long periods of time.
    During the informational meetings, a question arose as to the 
Agency's intent in eliminating the requirement that escapeways be 
routed to the ``nearest mine opening.'' It was not the Agency's intent 
to change this requirement from the previous standard. The existing 
requirement that the escapeway follow the most direct route to the 
surface would, in fact, require the route to go to the nearest mine 
opening. However, to eliminate any confusion that may exist, the 
proposal would revise paragraph (d)(5) and adopt language similar to 
that in previous regulation Sec. 75.1704-2(a), that the escapeway 
follow the most direct, safe and practical route to the nearest mine 
opening suitable for the safe evacuation of miners.
    A number of factors affect whether or not the safest, most direct, 
practical route has been selected. These factors include roof 
conditions, travel height, fan location, physical dimensions of the 
mine opening, and similar considerations. For example, if bad roof 
conditions are present along the shortest direct route and those roof 
conditions are beyond reasonable control, then an alternate ``safest'' 
route designated by the mine operator may be appropriate. However, the 
presence of roof falls does not necessarily indicate that the 
passageway would not be suitable for evacuation. By way of another 
example, where coal seam thickness varies to the extreme, the shortest 
route may be through lower coal, making travel relatively slow and 
difficult. An alternate route through a high passageway may permit 
easier travel. Such an alternate route, although longer, may be 
acceptable. Similarly, there can be instances where the ``nearest mine 
opening'' may not be suitable for safe evacuation of miners. For 
example, an old mine shaft may not be safe for travel because of badly 
deteriorated conditions, such as a deteriorated shaft lining or 
deteriorated timbers, even though the shaft is still suitable for mine 
ventilation purposes. A mine shaft developed and equipped with a 
ventilation fan prior to the effective date of this regulation may not 
be suitable for safe evacuation of miners if alterations were necessary 
for compliance with new safety regulations that would adversely affect 
mine ventilation in the event of an emergency.
    As with the existing standard, mine development projections would 
not have to be altered to provide additional rooms, entries, or 
crosscuts for the sole purpose of providing a passageway to the nearest 
mine opening. However, the construction of ventilation controls such as 
stoppings, overcasts and undercasts, or the installation of an escape 
facility may be required to provide the most direct, safe and practical 
route to the surface.
    As with the existing standard, proposed paragraph (f)(1) would 
require one escapeway that is ventilated with intake air to be 
designated as the primary escapeway.
    The proposed requirement for prohibiting certain equipment from 
operating in primary escapeways in paragraphs (f)(3) through (f)(5) 
would not apply to areas of escapeways where separation of belt and 
trolley haulage entries from designated primary escapeways did not 
exist before November 16, 1992. To require mobile equipment in these 
areas of escapeways to be equipped with fire suppression would have no 
appreciable safety benefit because of the presence of trolley wires, 
trolley haulage equipment, and conveyor belts in these escapeways.
    Paragraph (f)(3) of the proposal would clarify existing 
requirements by explicitly prohibiting coal haulage in the primary 
escapeway. The existing standard permits equipment to be in the 
escapeway for purposes of hauling miners and materials and for 
maintaining the escapeway. The existing standard does not expressly 
prohibit the haulage of coal in the primary escapeway. As a matter of 
clarification of intent, the proposal would specifically prohibit coal 
haulage in the primary escapeway.
    Through experience with the existing rule and after considering 
comments received, the Agency is proposing to extend the prohibition of 
certain equipment to other areas of primary escapeways so that the 
prohibitions would properly extend to the majority of primary 
escapeways. The proposal would extend the prohibitions to areas of 
primary escapeways developed prior to November 16, 1992 where 
separation of the escapeway from belt and trolley haulage entries 
existed as of November 16, 1992. As with the existing rule, the 
prohibition would not apply to equipment necessary to maintain the 
primary escapeway in safe, travelable condition. The primary escapeways 
excluded from these prohibitions are the same as those excluded from 
the application of Sec. 75.380(g), that is, areas of escapeways where 
separation of belt and trolley haulage entries from designated primary 
escapeways did not exist before November 16, 1992. Comments are 
solicited on the proposed expansion of the requirements for protecting 
additional areas of the primary escapeway.
    MSHA recognizes the need to protect the primary escapeway and also 
realizes that different mine designs, the need to maintain air courses 
safe for travel, and the need to occasionally move equipment 
necessitates the operation of some mobile equipment in the primary 
escapeway. MSHA would allow certain equipment in the primary escapeway 
but would require fire suppression systems on the equipment. Paragraph 
(f)(3) clarifies that mobile equipment not hauling coal and the 
equipment listed in Sec. 75.340(b)(1) through (b)(6) may be used in the 
primary escapeway.
    Unlike the existing standard, proposed paragraph (f)(4) would 
permit certain mobile equipment to be protected with a manual fire 
suppression system instead of an automatic system, provided it is 
continuously attended by a person trained and proficient in the use and 
operation of the fire suppression system. For the purposes of 
Sec. 75.380(f) by ``attended,'' the Agency means that the mobile 
equipment operator would be on the equipment and be capable of 
responding immediately in the event of a fire. When a piece of mobile 
equipment is in the primary escapeway and is properly attended and 
equipped with a manual fire suppression system, the equipment operator 
can immediately respond to the situation, and the safety afforded by 
the existing standard is maintained. However, if no one is attending 
the equipment, an automatic system would be necessary to protect 
against fire. Protection is thereby provided against a fire when a 
machine is deenergized or shut off. If a machine is solely equipped 
with a manual fire suppression system, continuous attendance would be 
required under the proposal, regardless of whether the machine were 
operating or shut off, if located in the primary escapeway.
    Following publication of the existing ventilation rule, some 
persons construed the requirement for an automatic fire suppression 
system to apply to electric face equipment. This was not the intent of 
the Agency. On November 16, 1992, MSHA issued Program Policy Letter No. 
P92-V-4 addressing the operation and location of equipment in primary 
escapeways to clarify the Agency's intent. Under existing regulation, 
subpart L--Fire Protection, face equipment is required to be protected 
by a manual fire suppression system. The proposal recognizes this 
requirement and, other than an exception to permit a situation such as 
the movement of continuous mining machines from section to section 
without a continuous water supply, requires that face equipment 
equipped with a manual fire suppression system be attended when in the 
primary escapeway by a person trained and proficient in the proper use 
and operation of the manual fire suppression system, providing 
protection equivalent to automatic fire suppression systems.
    It is proposed in paragraph (f)(4) that with exceptions for 
continuous mining machines and as provided in Sec. 75.380 (f)(5) and 
(f)(6) that each piece of mobile equipment in primary escapeways, (1) 
be equipped with manually operated fire suppression systems installed 
in compliance with Sec. 75.1107-3 through Sec. 75.1107-16 and be 
attended continuously, or (2) be equipped with an automatic fire 
suppression system that is capable of both automatic and manual 
activation and installed in compliance with Sec. 75.1107-3 through 
Sec. 75.1107-16.
    Under paragraph (f)(5), personnel carriers and small personnel 
conveyances which are designed and used solely for transportation of 
personnel and small hand tools could be operated with a multipurpose 
dry chemical type automatic fire suppression system capable of both 
manual and automatic activation, if the system is suitable for the 
intended application and listed or approved by a nationally recognized 
independent testing laboratory. The proposal recognizes the small size 
and limited potential for fire of this particular type of equipment. 
The types of machinery under paragraph (f)(5) would not be required to 
meet the additional requirements of Secs. 75.1107-3 through 75.1107-16. 
For example, it would be impractical and would not enhance safety to 
apply the minimum dry chemical poundage requirements of Sec. 75.1107-9 
to small equipment designed and used solely for personnel and small 
hand tools. Personnel carriers and small personnel conveyances would be 
more appropriately protected by fully automatic systems of adequate 
capacity which are suitable for the intended application and listed or 
approved by a nationally recognized independent testing laboratory.
    Commenters suggested that the term ``dry chemical'' would be more 
appropriate than the term ``dry powder'' used in the existing standard. 
The Agency agrees and the proposal would adopt this suggestion.
    Under paragraph (f)(6), an additional exception is provided for 
mobile equipment when no persons are inby other than persons directly 
engaged in the use or moving of the equipment. The continuous mining 
machine exception recognizes that the fire suppression system for the 
continuous mining machine often relies on a water supply that may be 
impracticable to provide during moves. Paragraph (f)(6) is being 
proposed to permit the necessary movement of face equipment between 
sections and to permit the primary escapeway to be properly maintained. 
Under paragraph (f)(6) of the proposal, mobile equipment not having a 
fire suppression system may be in the primary escapeway if no persons 
are located inby except those directly engaged in the use of or the 
moving of such equipment. For example, when moving longwall shields, no 
one would be permitted to be inby equipment used to move the shield if 
this equipment is not provided with a fire suppression system. With no 
persons working inby, the use of machinery without a fire suppression 
system would not expose persons to the hazard of toxic gases and fumes 
carried inby.
    It has been suggested to the Agency that certain types of emergency 
equipment, such as diesel powered ambulances, should also be exempt 
from the requirements for fire suppression systems. While the Agency 
recognizes the potential benefit that can be attached to the use of 
this type of equipment, the proposal does not exempt this equipment. 
Comments are solicited on this issue.
    During the informational meetings, the Agency became aware of a 
concern that existing Sec. 75.380(i)(2) would permit slopes of 
significant length and inclination to exist without any mechanical 
escape facilities. An example used is a slope of 900 feet inclined at 
18 degrees from the horizontal. It was suggested that such a slope 
could be particularly difficult for passage of injured persons under 
cold and icy conditions if mechanical escape facilities were not 
provided. In light of this concern, the Agency has reconsidered its 
position and is proposing in paragraph (i)(2) that any slope that is 
part of a designated escapeway and is inclined more than 9 degrees from 
the horizontal be provided with mechanical escape facilities. The 
Agency solicits comments on this proposal.
    Following promulgation of the standard, the Agency received 
comments that the final rule language should have retained the proposed 
rule language relative to ventilation of the primary and alternate 
escapeways with separate splits of intake air. As discussed in the 
preamble to the existing standard, this issue, along with several other 
issues, was referred to an advisory committee appointed by the 
Secretary of Labor. The advisory committee has submitted its final 
report to the Secretary for review and appropriate action.
    Section 75.380(b)(1) of the existing standard requires escapeways 
to be provided from each working section. A working section is defined 
in Sec. 75.2 as beginning at the underground loading point. The 
proposal would continue the practice of permitting mines which have not 
established a loading point to haul coal with mobile equipment.
    Providing escapeways during the installation and removal of 
mechanized mining equipment is necessary to provide safe escape for 
miners from hazards that may develop during these phases of the mining 
operations. Although the Agency believes that the promulgation of 
paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this standard was done appropriately, 
they are being reproposed for the purposes of receiving and giving 
consideration to all pertinent comments.
Section Sec. 75.382  Mechanical Escape Facilities
    Consistent with current requirements in subpart O--Hoisting and 
Mantrips, three new paragraphs are proposed under Sec. 75.382. 
Paragraph (g) would require the designated examiner to certify by date, 
time, and initials that the mechanical escape facilities examination 
required by paragraph (c) was performed. The proposal would require 
that the certification appear at or near the facility examined. 
Certification has long been an accepted practice in the mining industry 
for assuring that concerned individuals can readily determine that a 
required examination has been completed. In the case of mechanical 
escape facilities, if certification is not provided, precious time 
could be lost as the escape facility is tested prior to use. The 
certification proposed will provide the operator or the person using 
the facility with assurance that the facility is safe to use.
    Paragraph (h) would require that a record be made of the 
examination performed in accordance with paragraph (c). The results of 
the examination would be included in the record, including any 
deficiency found along with the corrective actions taken to correct the 
condition. The intent is that deficiencies be documented and that both 
the mine foreman and superintendent, or other appropriate official be 
made aware of any problems, assuring that follow-up and corrective 
action will be taken. As with other records required by the existing 
rule and this proposal, the record of the examination of mechanical 
escape facilities provides valuable information to both the miners and 
the operator. The record not only indicates that the examination has 
been completed but also provides historical information on the nature 
of deficiencies found during the examination and the type of corrective 
action required.
    The examiner would be permitted to complete the record immediately 
following the end of the shift in which the examination was performed. 
The record would be countersigned by the mine foreman by the end of the 
mine foreman's next regularly scheduled working shift. During an 
absence of the mine foreman, the person acting as mine foreman would 
countersign. The Agency intends that the mine foreman, the person most 
responsible for day-to-day operation of the mine, be notified of the 
information contained in the reports. Allowing until the end of the 
mine foreman's next regularly scheduled working shift to countersign 
the report would assure that the mine foreman is aware of the results 
of the examination and would enable corrective actions to be taken.
    Paragraph (h) would also require that within two scheduled 
production days thereafter, the record of the examination be 
countersigned by the mine superintendent, mine manager, or other mine 
official to whom the mine foreman is directly accountable. The intent 
is to assure that a higher-level official, empowered to redirect 
resources, be aware of any condition requiring corrective actions. 
Since this second-level official may not be physically located at the 
mine on a full-time basis, 2 scheduled production days are proposed as 
a reasonable period of time for countersigning.
    The proposal would require that the record be made in a state-
approved book or in a bound book with sequential machine-numbered 
pages. Comments are solicited on this approach and on an alternative 
approach wherein the Agency would develop, in coordination with the 
states, books specific for the required records.
    As with other records required by this proposal, proposed paragraph 
(i) would require that these records be retained for at least 1 year at 
a surface location at the mine and be made available for inspection by 
authorized representatives of the Secretary and the representative of 
miners. Records of examinations, provide the operator and other 
interested parties with a history of the types of problems discovered 
and the types of corrective actions required. In the opinion of the 
Agency, a 1-year retention period is sufficient to satisfy this need.
Section 75.383  Escapeway Maps and Drills
    Existing paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) deal with the escapeway map and 
drill requirements in areas where mechanized mining equipment is being 
installed or removed. Although the Agency believes that the 
promulgation of paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) of this standard was done 
appropriately, as with other provisions dealing with the installation 
and removal of mechanized mining equipment, they are being reproposed 
for the purposes of receiving and giving consideration to all pertinent 
comments. The Agency believes that for areas where mechanized mining 
equipment is being installed or removed, providing escapeways and 
posting maps identifying these escapeways and conducting drills 
specified in the standard are essential to maintain safety. These 
requirements help to assure that miners are familiar with escape routes 
so that, should escape become necessary, they can reach the surface as 
quickly as possible.
Section 75.384  Longwall and Shortwall Travelways
    Existing Sec. 75.384 addresses the requirements for a travelway on 
the tailgate side of a longwall or shortwall, the location and marking 
of the travelway, and procedures during a blockage of the travelway. 
While the Agency has received comments suggesting that additional 
involvement by the miners would be of benefit when a roof fall or other 
blockage occurs that prevents travel in the tailgate travelway, no 
changes are proposed to Sec. 75.384 at the present time. The Agency 
believes that the existing procedures and regulations appropriately 
address the hazards and provide a sufficient opportunity for input and 
involvement for all interested parties. The following discussion 
reviews the appropriate procedures and regulations.
    The general procedures to be followed when such a blockage occurs 
are specified in Sec. 75.384(c). The standard requires that work on the 
face must cease, miners must be withdrawn, and MSHA must be notified. 
The standard also prohibits work on the face until the procedures set 
out in Secs. 75.215 and 75.222 are implemented.
    Section 75.215 requires that the approved roof control plan specify 
the procedures that will be followed if a ground failure prevents 
travel out of the section through the tailgate side of the longwall. In 
this regard, Sec. 75.222(g)(2), the roof control plan, would address 
notification of the miners, re-instruction of the miners regarding 
escapeways and escape procedures, re-instruction of the miners on the 
availability and use of self-contained self-rescue devices, monitoring 
and evaluation of air; location and effectiveness of communication, and 
a means of transportation from the section. All approved roof control 
and ventilation plans and revisions must be available to the miners 
according to current regulations.
    District managers historically have met with and will continue to 
meet with interested parties to discuss plans under review or 
previously approved. As plans are developed, reviewed, and approved, 
MSHA considers written comments from all interested parties. 
Additionally, the Act entitles a representative of the miners to 
accompany an MSHA representative conducting an inspection or 
investigation as a result of the Sec. 75.384(c)(3) notification to MSHA 
of a blocked travelway. Finally, under Sec. 103(g) of the Act, miners 
are entitled to request an inspection by MSHA.
Section 75.388  Boreholes in Advance of Mining
    The Agency is proposing to revise Sec. 75.388(c) to require rib 
holes to be drilled in one or both ribs of advancing working places 
described in Sec. 75.388(a) ``as may be necessary for adequate 
protection of miners in such working places.'' The present standard 
requires that boreholes be drilled in at least one rib of advancing 
working places described in Sec. 75.388(a). Although no change was 
intended by the Agency in promulgating the current language, comments 
indicate that the previous language was more specific and clearer to 
the mining community. The Agency is therefore proposing to adopt 
language similar to the previous regulation.
Section 75.389  Mining Into Inaccessible Areas
    Section 75.389(c) addresses the special case where mining 
operations mine through into areas where hazards and potential hazards 
may be unknown. During the informational meetings and later 
discussions, it became apparent that differing interpretations of the 
application of this provision existed. To clarify the intent of the 
Agency, the proposal would revise existing Sec. 75.389(c) by adding an 
exception for routine mining-through operations that are a part of a 
retreat mining system approved in the mine ventilation plan.
    In some circumstances, the mining through occurs during routine 
mining into an area which is covered by an approved ventilation plan. 
In this case, the potential hazards have already been addressed in the 
ventilation plan. The Agency believes that the requirements set out in 
Sec. 75.389(c) should not apply in this situation and proposes an 
exception to these requirements where the mining-through operations are 
part of a retreat mining system approved in the mine ventilation plan 
and are routine operations. Requiring the operator to submit duplicate 
plans does not result in any safety benefit; therefore, the level of 
safety provided by the existing standard is maintained.

IV. Derivation Table

    The following derivation table lists the number of each proposed 
standard and the number of the existing standard from which it is 
derived. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      New section                                              Old section                      
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
75.301.................................................  75.301.                                                
75.310(a)(3)...........................................  Partly new, 75.310(a)(3).                              
75.310(a)(4)...........................................  Partly new, 75.310(a)(4).                              
75.310(c)..............................................  Partly new, 75.310(c).                                 
75.310(c)(5)...........................................  New.                                                   
75.311(d)..............................................  Partly new, 75.311(d).                                 
75.312(a)..............................................  Partly new, 75.312(a).                                 
75.312(b)(1)...........................................  Partly new, 75.312(b)(1).                              
75.312(b)(1)(i)........................................  New.                                                   
75.312(b)(1)(ii).......................................  75.312(b)(1) through (b)(1)(ii).                       
75.312(c)..............................................  Partly new, 75.312(c).                                 
75.312(d)..............................................  Partly new, 75.312(d).                                 
75.312(f)(1)...........................................  75.312(f).                                             
75.312(f)(2)...........................................  New.                                                   
75.312(g)..............................................  Partly new, 75.312(g).                                 
75.312(h)..............................................  Partly new, 75.312(h).                                 
75.313(a)(3)...........................................  75.313(a)(3).                                          
75.313(c)(2)...........................................  Partly new, 75.313(c)(2).                              
75.313(c)(3)...........................................  Partly new, 75.313(c)(3).                              
75.313(d)(1)(i)........................................  Partly new, 75.313(d)(1)(i).                           
75.313(d)(1)(ii).......................................  Partly new, 75.313(d)(1)(ii).                          
75.313(d)(2)...........................................  New.                                                   
75.320(e)..............................................  New.                                                   
75.321(a)(1)...........................................  Partly new, 75.321(a).                                 
75.321(a)(2)...........................................  Partly new, 75.321(a).                                 
75.323(b)(1)(i)........................................  75.323(b)(1)(i).                                       
75.323(b)(1)(ii).......................................  Partly new, 75.323(b)(1)(ii).                          
75.323(b)(1)(iii)......................................  75.323(b)(1)(iii).                                     
75.323(b)(2)...........................................  75.323(b)(2).                                          
75.323(c)(1)...........................................  Partly new, 75.323(c)(1).                              
75.323(d)(2)(i)........................................  Partly new, 75.323(d)(2)(i).                           
75.325(d)..............................................  75.325(d).                                             
75.330(c)..............................................  New.                                                   
75.332(a)(1)...........................................  75.332(a)(1).                                          
75.333(a)..............................................  Partly new, 75.333(a).                                 
75.333(b)(1)...........................................  75.333(b)(1).                                          
75.333(b)(3)...........................................  Partly new, 75.333(b)(3).                              
75.333(b)(4)...........................................  Partly new, 75.333(b)(4).                              
75.333(b)(5)...........................................  New.                                                   
75.333(b)(6)...........................................  75.333(b)(5).                                          
75.333(e)(1)(i)........................................  Partly new, 75.333(e)(1).                              
75.333(e)(1)(ii).......................................  Partly new, 75.333(e)(2).                              
75.333(h)..............................................  New.                                                   
75.334(e)..............................................  Partly new, 75.334(e).                                 
75.334(f)..............................................  75.334(f).                                             
75.340(a)..............................................  Partly new, 75.340(a).                                 
75.342(a)(4)...........................................  Partly new, 75.342(a)(4).                              
75.344(a)(1)...........................................  Partly new, 75.344(a)(1).                              
75.344(b)(2)...........................................  New.                                                   
75.344(b)(3)...........................................  75.344(b)(2).                                          
75.344(e)..............................................  New.                                                   
75.360(a)(1)...........................................  Partly new, 75.360(a)(1).                              
75.360(a)(2)...........................................  New.                                                   
75.360(b)..............................................  Partly new, 75.360(b).                                 
75.360(b)(1)...........................................  Partly new, 75.360(b)(1).                              
75.360(b)(3)...........................................  Partly new, 75.360(b)(3).                              
75.360(b)(4)...........................................  Partly new, 75.360(b)(4).                              
75.360(b)(6)(i)........................................  Partly new, 75.360(6).                                 
75.360(b)(6)(ii).......................................  Partly new, 75.360(6).                                 
75.360(b)(8)...........................................  New.                                                   
75.360(b)(9)...........................................  New.                                                   
75.360(b)(10)..........................................  New.                                                   
75.360(c)..............................................  Partly new, 75.360(c).                                 
75.360(c)(1)...........................................  Partly new, 75.360(c)(1).                              
75.360(c)(3)...........................................  Partly new, 75.360(c)(3).                              
75.360(f)..............................................  Partly new, 75.360(g).                                 
75.362(a)(1)...........................................  Partly new, 75.362(a)(1).                              
75.362(a)(2)...........................................  New.                                                   
75.362(c)(1)...........................................  Partly new, 75.362(c)(1).                              
75.362(c)(2)...........................................  75.362(c)(2).                                          
75.362(d)(1)(i)........................................  New.                                                   
75.362(d)(1)(iii)......................................  Partly new, 75.362(d)(1)(ii).                          
75.362(d)(2)...........................................  Partly new, 75.362(d)(2).                              
75.362(g)..............................................  New.                                                   
75.363.................................................  Partly new, 75.360, 75.361, 75.362, 75.364.            
75.364(a)..............................................  Partly new, 75.364(a).                                 
75.364(b)..............................................  Partly new, 75.364(b).                                 
75.364(h)..............................................  Partly new, 75.364(h).                                 
75.370(a)(3)...........................................  Partly new, 75.370(a)(3).                              
75.370(b)..............................................  New.                                                   
75.370(c)(1)...........................................  Partly new, 75.370(b)(1).                              
75.370(f)..............................................  Partly new, 75.370(e).                                 
75.371(b)..............................................  75.371(b).                                             
75.371(r)..............................................  75.371(r).                                             
75.371(s)..............................................  Partly new, 75.371(s).                                 
75.371(z)..............................................  Partly new, 75.371(z).                                 
75.371(bb).............................................  Partly new, 75.371(bb).                                
75.372(b)(3)...........................................  Partly new, 75.372(b)(3).                              
75.372(b)(19)..........................................  New.                                                   
75.372(b)(20)..........................................  New.                                                   
75.380(b)..............................................  75.380(b).                                             
75.380(d)(3)...........................................  Partly new, 75.380(d)(3).                              
75.380(d)(4)(ii).......................................  Partly new, 75.380(d)(4)(ii).                          
75.380(d)(4)(iii)......................................  New.                                                   
75.380(d)(5)...........................................  Partly new, 75.380(d)(5).                              
75.380(f)(1)...........................................  Partly new, 75.380(f)(1).                              
75.380(f)(2)...........................................  New.                                                   
75.380(f)(3)...........................................  Partly new, 75.380(f)(1).                              
75.380(f)(4)...........................................  Partly new, 75.380(f)(2).                              
75.380(f)(5)...........................................  Partly new, 75.380(f)(2).                              
75.380(f)(6)...........................................  New.                                                   
75.380(i)(2)...........................................  Partly new, 75.380(i)(2).                              
75.382(g)..............................................  New.                                                   
75.382(h)..............................................  New.                                                   
75.382(i)..............................................  New.                                                   
75.383(a)..............................................  75.383(a).                                             
75.383(b)(1)...........................................  75.383(b)(1).                                          
75.388(c)..............................................  Partly new, 75.388(c).                                 
75.389(c)..............................................  New.                                                   
75.389(1)..............................................  75.389(c)(1).                                          
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Redesignation Table

    The following redesignation table lists the section number of the 
existing standard and the section numbers of proposed standards which 
contain revised provisions derived from the corresponding existing 
section.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      New section                                              Old section                      
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
75.310(a)(3)...........................................  75.310(a)(3).                                          
75.310(a)(4)...........................................  75.310(a)(4).                                          
75.310(a)(5)...........................................  75.310(a)(6).                                          
75.310(a)(6)...........................................  75.310(a)(7).                                          
75.310(c)..............................................  75.310(c).                                             
75.311(d)..............................................  75.311(d).                                             
75.312(a)..............................................  75.312(a).                                             
75.312(b)(1)(i)........................................  75.312(b)(1)(ii)(A).                                   
75.312(b)(1)(ii).......................................  75.312(b)(1)(ii)(B).                                   
75.312(c)..............................................  75.312(c).                                             
75.312(d)..............................................  75.312(d).                                             
75.312(f)..............................................  75.312(f)(1).                                          
75.312(g)(1)...........................................  75.312(g)(1).                                          
75.312(g)(2)...........................................  75.312(g)(3).                                          
75.312(g)(3)...........................................  75.312(g)(4).                                          
75.312(h)..............................................  75.312(h).                                             
75.313(c)(2)...........................................  75.313(c)(2).                                          
75.313(c)(3)...........................................  75.313(c)(3).                                          
75.313(d)(1)(i)........................................  75.313(d)(1)(i).                                       
75.313(d)(1)(ii).......................................  75.313(d)(1)(ii).                                      
75.313(d)(2)...........................................  75.313(d)(2).                                          
75.321(a)..............................................  75.321(a)(1).                                          
75.321(a)..............................................  75.321(a)(2).                                          
75.323(b)(1)(ii).......................................  75.323(b)(1)(ii).                                      
75.323(c)(1)...........................................  75.323(c)(1).                                          
75.323(d)(2)(i)........................................  75.323(d)(2)(i).                                       
75.333(b)(5)...........................................  75.333(b)(6).                                          
75.334(e)..............................................  75.334(e).                                             
75.340(a)..............................................  75.340(a).                                             
75.342(a)(4)...........................................  75.342(a)(4).                                          
75.344(a)(1)...........................................  75.344(a)(1).                                          
75.344(b)(2)...........................................  75.344(b)(3).                                          
75.360(a)..............................................  75.360(a)(1).                                          
75.360(b)..............................................  75.360(b).                                             
75.360(b)(1)...........................................  75.360(b)(1).                                          
75.360(b)(3)...........................................  75.360(b)(3).                                          
75.360(b)(4)...........................................  75.350(b)(4).                                          
75.360(b)(6)...........................................  75.360(b)(6)(i).                                       
75.360(b)(6)...........................................  75.360(b)(6)(ii).                                      
75.360(c)..............................................  75.360(c).                                             
75.360(c)(1)...........................................  75.360(c)(1).                                          
75.360(c)(3............................................  75.360(c)(3).                                          
75.360(e)..............................................  75.360(e), 75.363.                                     
75.360(g)..............................................  75.360(g).                                             
75.362(a)(1)...........................................  75.362(a)(1)(i).                                       
75.362(c)(1)...........................................  75.362(c)(1).                                          
75.362(d)(1)(i)........................................  75.362(d)(1)(ii).                                      
75.362(d)(1)(ii).......................................  75.362(d)(1)(iii).                                     
75.362(d)(2)...........................................  75.362(d)(2).                                          
75.362(g)..............................................  Removed.                                               
75.362(h)..............................................  Removed.                                               
75.364(a)..............................................  75.364(a).                                             
75.364(b)..............................................  75.364(b).                                             
75.364(h)..............................................  75.364(h).                                             
75.370(a)(3)...........................................  75.370(a)(3).                                          
75.370(b)(1)...........................................  75.370(c)(1).                                          
75.370(c)..............................................  75.370(d).                                             
75.370(d)..............................................  75.370(e).                                             
75.370(f)..............................................  75.370(g).                                             
75.371(s)..............................................  75.371(s).                                             
75.371(z)..............................................  75.371(z).                                             
75.371(bb).............................................  75.371(bb).                                            
75.372(b)(3)...........................................  75.372(b)(3).                                          
75.380(d)(3)...........................................  75.380(d)(3).                                          
75.380(d)(4)(ii).......................................  75.380(d)(4)(ii).                                      
75.380(d)(5)...........................................  75.380(d)(5).                                          
75.380(f)..............................................  75.380(f).                                             
75.380(i)(2)...........................................  75.380(i)(2).                                          
75.388(c)..............................................  75.388(c).                                             
75.389(c)(1)...........................................  75.389(1).                                             
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act

    In accordance with Executive Order 12866 MSHA prepared a 
preliminary impact analysis (PRIA) to estimate the potential costs and 
benefits associated with the proposed revisions to the ventilation 
rule. Based upon the available data, MSHA has determined in its PRIA 
that this rule would neither result in major cost increases nor have an 
effect of $100 million or more on the economy. A copy of the PRIA is 
available from the MSHA docket office and is summarized as follows.

Benefits

    In assessing costs and benefits of the ventilation rule, it is 
important to note that ventilation of underground coal mines is the 
primary method of preventing the accumulation of explosive methane gas, 
controlling harmful respirable dust, and assuring the quality of air 
miners breath. Because of the potential for a large number of 
fatalities resulting from ventilation problems, MSHA has found it 
prudent to establish multiple safety factors and safety work practices 
to better assure adequate protection for miners. It is extremely 
difficult to specifically quantify safety benefits related to each 
safety factor. However, due to the close, confined nature of the 
workplace in an underground coal mine, failure of any safety factors or 
protective actions related to ventilation can have disastrous effects. 
In 1984, a fire starting from an over heated compressor at the Wilberg 
Mine resulted in 27 deaths. More recently, an explosion at the William 
Station Mine in 1989 resulted in 10 deaths and exposed other miners to 
high concentrations of carbon monoxide and smoke. In the restricted 
work environment of an underground coal mine, failure of a single 
safety factor or noncompliance with a safe work practice could 
jeopardize the well-being of all miners underground. The total effect 
of the provisions in this proposed rule in conjunction with MSHA's 
existing ventilation standards should decrease the occurrence of 
fatalities, injuries, accidents, and illnesses in underground coal 
mines.
    With respect to this proposed rule, the Agency has identified nine 
fatalities and seven injuries which potentially could have been 
prevented by compliance with these proposed provisions. In addition, 
the proposal contains provisions to better assure compliance with the 
respirable dust control parameters specified in the mine ventilation 
plan. Adherence to these parameters helps to maintain a work 
environment free of excessive levels of respirable dust, thereby 
improving long-term health protection for miners and potentially 
reducing the number of miners afflicted with coal workers' 
pneumoconiosis.
    Some proposed provisions clarify the intent of the current rule. 
Such clarifications should increase the likelihood of compliance and 
thereby would help to increase the probability of preventing a 
fatality, injury, or non-injury accident. For the proposed provisions 
which would offer an alternative compliance option, the miners would be 
provided at least the same level of safety provided by an existing 
requirement. These provisions would facilitate compliance by the 
operator, thereby increasing the potential for the rule to reduce the 
probability of a ventilation-related explosion or accident.
    In conclusion, the Agency determined that these proposed provisions 
would increase the probability that compliance with the ventilation 
rule would prevent future ventilation-related accidents and generate a 
safer mining environment.

Compliance Costs

    MSHA has compared the costs associated with the existing 
requirements with the costs of the proposed requirements. For the 
purpose of estimating the incremental compliance cost increases or 
decreases, these proposed provisions have been divided into three 
categories, each category requiring a slightly different approach in 
estimating the costs of compliance.
    The first category includes those proposed provisions which retain 
or clarify requirements specified in the existing rule. For this 
category, there would be no additional costs of compliance if these 
were estimated in the RIA to the May 1992 rule.
    The second category includes those proposed provisions that would 
provide a mine operator with an alternative compliance option to an 
existing requirement (for example, allowing a miner to continuously 
attend an operating compressor instead of requiring the compressor to 
be located in a noncombustible structure). For this category, the 
availability of an alternative compliance option can affect the level 
of compliance, depending on the alternative selected. Thus, the 
availability of an alternative compliance option could reduce the costs 
of compliance for some mine operators. However, the potential 
compliance cost savings depend upon whether the operator selects the 
alternative compliance option. MSHA believes that the operator's 
decision would depend on factors that may vary widely among mines, 
therefore, MSHA estimated a percentage of mines likely to use a 
specific option and based its projected cost savings on these 
estimates.
    The third category includes those proposed provisions that would 
impose new requirements (for example, requiring an automatic shut down 
feature on a mobile compressor when the fire suppression system is 
activated). For this category, the potential incremental compliance 
costs were estimated by using full compliance with the existing rule or 
existing industry practices as the baseline.
    Based on the available data, MSHA estimated that compliance with 
the proposed rule would cost the mining industry $3.8 million in first-
year costs, or about $826,500 in annualized costs. Net annual 
compliance costs would be about $7.6 million. The total of annualized 
plus annual costs is projected to be about $8.4 million. In addition to 
these incremental costs, during the first year of compliance with the 
new air quality requirements under Sec. 75.321, it is possible that two 
large mines may lose a block of coal, resulting in approximately $6 
million in lost production to these mines.
    Executive Order 12866 requires that regulatory agencies assess the 
impact to the government for any regulation determined to be a 
significant regulatory action. MSHA does not believe that the proposed 
rule will create any significant cost impacts to the government. The 
proposed regulation can be implemented under existing government 
practices without any substantial equipment or facility expenditures by 
the government.
    The incremental compliance costs for all underground coal mines are 
listed by provision in Table I. 

 Table I.--Compliance Costs to Comply With the Proposed Ventilation Rule
                     for All Underground Coal Mines                     
                       [In thousands of dollars]                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            First                       
                 Standard                    year   Annualized   Annual 
                                            costs      costs      costs 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
75.310...................................       74         12        15 
75.311...................................  .......  ..........  ........
75.312...................................  .......  ..........     (874)
75.313...................................  .......  ..........      296 
75.320...................................  .......  ..........  ........
75.321...................................     \1\1         .5       200 
75.323...................................  .......  ..........  ........
75.330...................................  .......  ..........  ........
75.333...................................  .......  ..........  ........
75.334...................................  .......  ..........  ........
75.340...................................       33          6           
75.342...................................       48          8        48 
75.344...................................       75         15        (1)
75.360...................................      142         23     2,794 
75.362...................................  .......  ..........    4,078 
75.363...................................  .......  ..........      119 
75.364...................................  .......  ..........      480 
75.370...................................       13          2         2 
75.371...................................  .......  ..........  ........
75.372...................................  .......  ..........  ........
75.380...................................    3,417        760       299 
75.382...................................  .......  ..........      113 
75.388...................................  .......  ..........  ........
75.389...................................  .......  ..........  ........
                                          ------------------------------
Total Costs..............................    3,803      826.5    7,569  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\In addition, to first year costs, two large mines could possibly lose
  a block of coal for a total loss of $6 million (or $3 million per     
  mine), or the mines may be able to forego such costs by sinking an    
  additional shaft costing a total of $2 million ($1 million per mine). 

Economic Impacts

    The proposed ventilation rule would have a minimal impact upon 
labor productivity, profits, prices, mining output, and mining 
employment in underground coal mines. However, there is the potential 
that some individual mines may incur significant compliance costs 
associated with several provisions. First, some mines may be affected 
by the provision that would establish the minimum oxygen level and 
maximum carbon dioxide level for the air in bleeder entries and worked-
out areas where persons work or travel. In order to obtain a complete 
and accurate cost of this proposed requirement, MSHA is requesting data 
on the number of mines that would encounter an air quality problem 
where a miner would be required to work or travel, the types of actions 
needed for compliance, and the expected incremental costs of these 
actions. Second, mines with deep cut sections would likely have 
difficulty conducting methane measurements at the face. Therefore, MSHA 
is requesting data on alternative compliance measures for deep cut 
mining operations. Finally, mines may experience some difficulty 
reconfiguring operations to address requirements concerning equipment 
in primary escapeways.

Regulatory Flexibility Certification

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires that agencies evaluate and 
include, wherever possible, compliance alternatives that minimize any 
adverse impact on small businesses when developing regulatory 
standards. MSHA has not exempted small mines from any provision of the 
proposed rule and small mines would benefit from some of the proposed 
provisions and the proposed alternative compliance methods.
    MSHA determined that these proposed revisions would not generate a 
substantial cost increase for small mines. The lack of a substantial 
cost increase for small mines, in conjunction with the fact that 
similar hazards exist in both large and small mining operations, 
indicates that regulatory relief is not warranted for small mining 
operations. Therefore, MSHA has determined that these proposed 
provisions would not have a significantly adverse impact upon a 
substantial number of small entities.
    The incremental costs for small and large mines are listed by 
provision in Table II.

  TABLE II.--Compliance Costs to Comply With the Proposed Ventilation Rule for Small and Large Underground Coal 
                                                      Mines                                                     
                                           [in thousands of dollars]                                            
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    First year costs          Annualized costs              Annual costs        
           Standard            ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Small        Large        Small        Large        Small          Large     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
75.310........................           24           50            4            8            5              10 
75.311........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...............
75.312........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........          316          (1,190)
75.313........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........             296 
75.320........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...............
75.321........................  ...........         \1\1  ...........           .5  ...........             200 
75.323........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...............
75.330........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...............
75.333........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...............
75.334........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...............
75.340........................           16           17            3            3  ...........  ...............
75.342........................           24           24            4            4           24              24 
75.344........................  ...........           75  ...........           15  ...........              (1)
75.360........................           47           95            8           15          317           2,477 
75.362........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........        1,095           2,983 
75.363........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........           17             102 
75.364........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........          145             335 
75.370........................            4            9            1            1            1               1 
75.371........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...............
75.372........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...............
75.380........................          888        2,529          199          561           78             221 
75.382........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........            2             111 
75.388........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...............
75.389........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...............
                                                                                                                
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total...................        1,003        2,800          219        607.5        2,000           5,569 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\In addition to first year costs, two large mines could possibly lose a block of coal for a total loss of $6  
  million (or $3 million per mine), or the mines might be able to forego such costs by sinking an additional    
  shaft costing a total of $2 million ($1 million per mine).                                                    

Request for Data

    MSHA requests specific information and data concerning any of the 
assumptions and estimates made in its PRIA. In particular, MSHA 
requests information on four proposed provisions. First, with respect 
to Sec. 75.312, ``Main mine fan examinations and records,'' MSHA 
requests data concerning any potential cost impacts to the mining 
industry that may occur as a result of using an alternative test that 
does not require stopping the fan. Second, with respect to Sec. 75.321, 
``Air quality,'' MSHA requests data on the number of mines that would 
encounter an air quality problem (either at an evaluation point or 
going to and from an evaluation point), the current air quality level 
at these mines, the types of actions needed for compliance, and the 
expected incremental costs of these actions. Third, with respect to 
Sec. 75.362, ``On-shift examination,'' MSHA requests data on 
alternative compliance measures that deep cut mining operations, in 
particular, would be able to use to conduct methane tests at the face. 
Fourth, with respect to Sec. 75.380, MSHA requests information on the 
cost of compliance associated with prohibiting certain equipment in the 
primary escapeway, and costs related to alternative compliance 
measures.

VI. Metric Measurements

    The proposed rule has been prepared using the inch-pound system of 
measurement (English system) instead of the SI (metric) system. 
However, the Agency remains committed to accomplishing an orderly 
transition to the SI system. The following table is intended to aid in 
the conversion to metric units. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Quantity            From              To             Multiply by    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Length..........  Inches.........  Centimeters....  2.54                
                  Feet...........  Meters.........  0.304               
Area............  Square feet....  Square meters..  0.093               
Velocity........  Feet/minute....  Meters/second..  0.005               
Pressure........  Lbs/sq.in......  Kilopascals....  6.895               
                  Lbs/sq.ft......  Kilopascals....  0.049               
Air quantity....  Cu.ft./min.....  Cu.meters/sec..  0.00047             
Power...........  Horsepower.....  Kilowatts......  0.746               
Temperature.....  Degrees F......  Degrees C......  TC=(TF-32)/1.8      
------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 75

    Escapeways, Mine safety and health, Underground coal mines, 
Ventilation.

    Dated: May 12, 1994.
J. Davitt McAteer,
Assistant Secretary for Mine Safety and Health.

    It is proposed to amend part 75, subchapter O, chapter I of title 
30 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 75--MANDATORY SAFETY STANDARDS--UNDERGROUND COAL MINES

    1. The authority citation for part 75 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 30 U.S.C. 811, 957, and 961.

    2. Section 75.301 is amended by revising the definition of ``Return 
Air'' to read as follows:


Sec. 75.301  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Return air. Air that has ventilated the last working place on any 
split of any working section or any worked-out area whether pillared or 
nonpillared. If air mixes with air that has ventilated the last working 
place on any split of any working section or any worked-out area, 
whether pillared or nonpillared, it is considered return air. For the 
purposes of existing Sec. 75.507-1, air that has been used to ventilate 
any working place in a coal producing section or pillared area, or air 
that has been used to ventilate any working face if such air is 
directed away from the immediate return is return air. Notwithstanding 
the definition of intake air, for the purpose of ventilation of 
structures, areas or installations that are required by this subpart D 
to be ventilated to return air courses, and for ventilation of seals, 
other air courses may be designated as return air courses by the 
operator only when the air in these air courses will not be used to 
ventilate working places or other locations, structures,
installations or areas required to be ventilated with intake air.
* * * * *
    3. Section 75.310 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(3), (a)(4) 
and (c), to read as follows:


Sec. 75.310  Installation of main mine fans.

    (a) * * *
    (3) Equipped with an automatic device that gives a signal at the 
mine when the fan either slows or stops. A responsible person 
designated by the operator shall always be at a surface location at the 
mine where the signal can be seen or heard while anyone is underground. 
This person shall be provided with two-way communication with the 
working sections and other established locations where persons are 
normally assigned to work;
    (4) Equipped with a pressure recording device or system. If a 
device or system other than a circular pressure recorder is used to 
monitor main mine fan pressure, the monitoring device or system shall 
provide a continuous graph or continuous chart of the pressure as a 
function of time. At not more than 7-day intervals, a hard copy of the 
continuous graph or chart shall be generated. Records of the fan 
pressure shall be retained at a surface location at the mine for at 
least 1 year and be made available for inspection by authorized 
representatives of the Secretary and the representative of miners. 
Mines that are permitted to shut down main mine fans under Sec. 75.311 
may use an alternative device for monitoring main mine fan pressure 
that does not provide a continuous record, provided it is approved in 
the ventilation plan;
* * * * *
    (c) If a main mine fan monitoring system is used under Sec. 75.312, 
the system shall--
    (1) Record, as described in paragraph (a)(4) the mine ventilating 
pressure;
    (2) Monitor bearing temperature, revolutions per minute, vibration, 
electric voltage, and amperage;
    (3) Provide, on demand, a printout of the monitored parameters, 
including the mine ventilating pressure; and
    (4) Be equipped with an automatic device that signals when--
    (i) An electrical or mechanical deficiency exists in the monitoring 
system; or
    (ii) A sudden increase or loss in mine ventilating pressure occurs.
    (5) Provide monitoring, records, printouts, and signals required by 
paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4) at a surface location at the mine 
where a responsible person designated by the operator is always on duty 
and where signals from the monitoring system can be seen or heard while 
anyone is underground. This person shall be provided with two-way 
communication with the working sections and other established locations 
where persons are normally assigned to work.
* * * * *
    4. Section 75.311 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 75.311  Main mine fan operation.

* * * * *
    (d) If an unusual variance in the mine ventilation pressure is 
observed, or if an electrical or mechanical deficiency of a main mine 
fan is detected, the mine superintendent, assistant mine 
superintendent, or mine foreman shall be notified immediately, and 
appropriate action or repairs shall be instituted promptly.
* * * * *
    5. Section 75.312 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b)(1), 
(c), (d), (g)(1), and (h); by redesignating paragraph (f) as (f)(1) and 
revising it; by redesignating paragraphs (g)(2) and (g)(3) as 
paragraphs (g)(3) and (g)(4) and revising them, and by adding new 
paragraphs (f)(2), (g)(2) and (g)(5) to read as follows:


Sec. 75.312  Main mine fan examinations and records.

    (a) To assure electrical and mechanical reliability of main mine 
fans, each main mine fan and its associated components, including 
devices for measuring or recording mine ventilation pressure, shall be 
examined for proper operation by a trained person designated by the 
operator. Examinations of main mine fans shall be made at least once 
each day that the fan operates, unless a functioning fan monitoring 
system is used in accordance with Sec. 75.310. No examination is 
required on any day when no one, including certified persons, goes 
underground, but an examination shall be conducted prior to anyone 
entering the mine.
    (b) (1) If a main mine fan monitoring system is used, a trained 
person designated by the operator shall--
    (i) At least once each day obtain and review the data provided by 
the fan monitoring system to assure that the fan and the fan monitoring 
system are operating properly. No review is required on any day when no 
one, including certified persons, goes underground, but a review of the 
data shall be performed prior to anyone entering the mine. Data 
reviewed should include the fan pressure, bearing temperature, 
revolutions per minute, vibration, electric voltage, and amperage; and
    (ii) At least every 7 days--
    (A) Test the monitoring system for proper operation; and
    (B) Examine each main mine fan and its associated components to 
assure electrical and mechanical reliability of main mine fans.
* * * * *
    (c) At least every 31 days, the automatic fan signal device for 
each main mine fan shall be tested by stopping the fan. Notwithstanding 
the provisions of Sec. 75.311, underground power may remain energized 
during this test. If the fan is not restarted within 15 minutes, 
underground power shall be deenergized and no one shall enter any 
underground area of the mine, except as provided in this paragraph 
below, until the fan is restarted and an examination of the mine is 
conducted as described in Sec. 75.360 (b) through (e) and the mine has 
been determined to be safe. Only persons necessary to evaluate the 
effect of the fan stoppage or restart, or to perform maintenance or 
repair work that cannot otherwise be made while the fan is operating, 
shall be permitted underground. An alternative test that does not 
require stopping the fan may be used provided it provides the same 
level of assurance that the fan signal will function as intended during 
fan stoppages and the alternative method is approved in the ventilation 
plan.
    (d) At least every 31 days, the automatic closing doors in multiple 
main mine fan systems shall be tested by stopping the fan. 
Notwithstanding the provisions of Sec. 75.311, underground power may 
remain energized during this test. If the fan is not restarted within 
15 minutes, underground power shall be deenergized and no one shall 
enter any underground area of the mine, except as provided in this 
section, until the fan is restarted and an examination of the mine is 
conducted as described in Sec. 75.360 (b) through (e) and the mine has 
been determined to be safe. Only persons necessary to evaluate the 
effect of the fan stoppage or restart, or to perform maintenance or 
repair work that cannot otherwise be made while the fan is operating, 
shall be permitted underground. An alternative test that does not 
require stopping the fan may be used, provided it provides the same 
level of assurance that the automatic closing doors will function as 
intended during fan stoppages and the alternative method is approved in 
the ventilation plan.
* * * * *
    (f) (1) Certification. Persons making main mine fan examinations 
shall certify by initials and date at the fan or another location 
specified by the operator that the examinations were made. Each 
certification shall identify the main mine fan examined.
    (2) Persons reviewing data produced by a main mine fan monitoring 
system shall certify by initials and date on a printed copy of the data 
from the system that the review was completed.
    (g) (1) Recordkeeping. By the end of the shift on which the 
examination is made, persons making main mine fan examinations shall 
record all defects found during the examination that may affect the 
operation of the fan. Records shall be maintained in a state-approved 
book or in a bound book with sequential machine-numbered pages.
    (2) When a fan monitoring system is used in lieu of the daily fan 
examination--
    (i) The certified copies of data produced by fan monitoring systems 
shall be maintained separate from other computer-generated reports or 
data; and
    (ii) A record shall be made of any fan monitoring system 
malfunctions, electrical or mechanical deficiencies in the monitoring 
system and any sudden increase or loss in mine ventilating pressure. 
The record shall be made by the end of the shift on which the review of 
the data is completed and shall be maintained in a state-approved book 
or in a bound book with sequential machine-numbered pages.
    (3) At mines permitted to shut down main mine fans under 
Sec. 75.311, if a pressure recording device is not used, a record shall 
be made of the time and fan pressure immediately before the fan is 
stopped, and after the fan is restarted and the fan pressure 
stabilizes. Records shall be maintained in a state-approved book or in 
a bound book with sequential machine-numbered pages.
    (4) By the end of the shift on which the monthly test of the 
automatic fan signal device or the automatic closing doors is 
completed, persons making these tests shall record the results of the 
tests. Records shall be maintained in a state-approved book or in a 
bound book with sequential machine-numbered pages.
    (5) The records required by paragraphs (g) (1) through (4) of this 
section shall be countersigned by the mine foreman by the end of the 
mine foreman's next regularly scheduled working shift. Within 2 
scheduled production days thereafter, the record shall also be 
countersigned by the mine superintendent, mine manager, or other mine 
official to whom the mine foreman is directly accountable.
    (h) Retention period. Records, including records of mine fan 
pressure and the certified copies of data produced by fan monitoring 
systems, shall be retained at a surface location at the mine for at 
least 1 year from the date of the last entry and shall be made 
available for inspection by authorized representatives of the Secretary 
and the representative of miners.
* * * * *
    6. Section 75.313 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(2) and 
(c)(3), (d)(1) (i) and (ii), and (d)(2) of the stayed standard to read 
as follows:


Sec. 75.313  Main mine fan stoppage with persons underground.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) Underground electric power circuits shall be deenergized. 
However, circuits necessary to withdraw persons from the mine need not 
be deenergized if located in areas or haulageways where methane is not 
likely to migrate to or accumulate. These circuits shall be deenergized 
as persons are withdrawn; and
    (3) Mechanized equipment not located on working sections shall be 
shut off. However, mechanized equipment necessary to withdraw persons 
from the mine need not be shut off if located in areas where methane is 
not likely to migrate to or accumulate.
    (d)(1) * * *
    (i) No one other than designated certified examiners shall enter 
any underground area of the mine until an examination of the mine is 
conducted as described in Sec. 75.360(b) through (e) and the area has 
been determined to be safe.
    (ii) Underground power circuits shall not be energized and 
nonpermissible mechanized equipment shall not be started or operated in 
an area until an examination of the mine is conducted as described in 
Sec. 75.360(b) through (e) and the area has been determined to be safe.
    (2) If ventilation is restored to the mine before miners reach the 
surface, all miners except designated certified examiners shall 
continue to the surface. No one other than certified persons conducting 
examinations required by this subpart shall enter the mine until an 
examination of the mine is conducted as described in Sec. 75.360(b) 
through (e) and the mine has been determined to be safe. A record of 
all hazardous conditions found during this examination shall be made in 
accordance with Sec. 75.363.
* * * * *
    7. The Agency is asking for comments on paragraph (a)(3) of 
Sec. 75.313, which is identical to the text published in the Federal 
Register on May 15, 1992 (57 FR 20916). This paragraph is being 
reproposed and republished for the convenience of the readers to read 
as follows:


Sec. 75.313  Main mine fan stoppage with persons underground.

* * * * *
    (a)(3) Everyone shall be withdrawn from the working sections and 
areas where mechanized mining equipment is being installed or removed.
* * * * *
    8. Section 75.320 is amended by adding paragraph (e) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 75.320   Air quality detectors and measurement devices.

* * * * *
    (e) Maintenance of instruments required by paragraphs (a) through 
(d) of this section shall be done by persons trained in such 
maintenance. Before each shift, care shall be taken to assure that any 
instrument to be used on that shift is in permissible condition.
* * * * *
    9. Section 75.321 is amended by revising suspended paragraph (a) to 
read as follows:


Sec. 75.321  Air quality.

    (a) (1) The air in areas where persons work or travel, except as 
specified in paragraph (a) (2) of this section, shall contain at least 
19.5 percent oxygen and not more than 0.5 percent carbon dioxide, and 
the volume and velocity of the air current in these areas shall be 
sufficient to dilute, render harmless, and carry away flammable, 
explosive, noxious, and harmful gases, dusts, smoke, and fumes.
    (2) The air in areas of bleeder entries and worked-out areas where 
persons work or travel shall contain at least 19.5 percent oxygen, and 
carbon dioxide levels shall not exceed 0.5 percent time weighted 
average and 3.0 percent short term exposure limit.
* * * * *
    10. Section 75.323 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1)(ii), 
(c)(1), and (d)(2)(i) to read as follows:


Sec. 75.323  Actions for excessive methane.

* * * * *
    (b) (1) * * *
    (ii) Changes or adjustments shall be made at once to the 
ventilation system to reduce the concentration of methane to less than 
1.0 percent; and
    (c) * * *
    (1) When 1.0 percent or more methane is present in a return air 
split between the last working place on a working section and where 
that split of air meets another split of air, or the location at which 
the split is used to ventilate seals or worked-out areas changes or 
adjustments shall be made at once to the ventilation system to reduce 
the concentration of methane in the return air to less than 1.0 
percent.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) Changes or adjustments shall be made at once to the ventilation 
system to reduce the concentration of methane in the return air below 
1.5 percent;
* * * * *
    11. The Agency is asking for comments on the following provisions 
of paragraphs (b) (1) introductory text, (b)(1)(i), (b)(1)(iii) and 
(b)(2) of Sec. 75.323 which is identical to the text published in the 
Federal Register on May 15, 1992 (57 FR 20917). These provisions are 
being reproposed and republished for the convenience of the readers to 
read as follows:


Sec. 75.323  Actions for excessive methane.

* * * * *
    (b) Working places and intake air courses. (1) When 1.0 percent or 
more methane is present in a working place or an intake air course, 
including an air course in which a belt conveyor is located, or in an 
area where mechanized mining equipment is being installed or removed--
    (i) Except intrinsically safe atmospheric monitoring systems (AMS), 
electrically powered equipment in the affected area shall be 
deenergized, and other mechanized equipment shall be shut off;
 * * * * *
    (iii) No other work shall be permitted in the affected area until 
the methane concentration is less than 1.0 percent.
    (2) When 1.5 percent or more methane is present in a working place 
or an intake air course, including an air course in which a belt 
conveyor is located, or in an area where mechanized mining equipment is 
being installed or removed--
    (i) Everyone except those persons referred to in Sec. 104(c) of the 
Act shall be withdrawn from the affected area; and
    (ii) Except for intrinsically safe AMS, electrically powered 
equipment in the affected area shall be disconnected at the power 
source.
* * * * *
    12. The Agency is asking for comments on paragraph (d) of 
Sec. 75.325 which is identical to the text published in the Federal 
Register on May 15, 1992 (57 FR 20917). This paragraph is being 
reproposed and republished for the convenience of the readers to read 
as follows:


Sec. 75.325  Air quantity.

* * * * *
    (d) Ventilation shall be maintained during installation and removal 
of mechanized mining equipment. The approved ventilation plan shall 
specify the quantity of air, the locations where this quantity will be 
provided and the ventilation controls required.
* * * * *
    13. Section 75.330 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 75.330  Face ventilation control devices.

* * * * *
    (c) When the line brattice or any other face ventilation control 
device is damaged to an extent that ventilation of the working face is 
inadequate, production activities in the working place shall cease 
until necessary repairs are made and adequate ventilation is restored.
    14. The Agency is asking for comments on paragraph (a)(1) of 
Sec. 75.332 which is identical to the text published in the Federal 
Register on May 15, 1992 (57 FR 20918). This paragraph is being 
reproposed and republished for the convenience of the readers to read 
as follows:


Sec. 75.332  Working sections and working places.

    (a)(1) Each working section and each area where mechanized mining 
equipment is being installed or removed, shall be ventilated by a 
separate split of intake air directed by overcasts, undercasts or other 
permanent ventilation controls.
* * * * *
    15. Section 75.333 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b)(1), 
(b)(3), (b)(4), and (e)(1) and adding a new paragraph (h) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 75.333  Ventilation controls.

    (a) For purposes of this section, ``doors'' includes any 
doorframes.
    (b) * * *
    (1) Between intake and return air courses, except temporary 
controls may be used in rooms that are 600 feet or less from the 
centerline of the entry from which the room was developed including 
where continuous face haulage systems are used in such rooms. Unless 
otherwise approved in the ventilation plan, these stoppings or controls 
shall be maintained to and including the third connecting crosscut 
outby the working face;
* * * * *
    (3) To separate belt conveyor haulageways from intake air courses 
when the air in the intake air course is used to provide air to active 
working places. When continuous face haulage systems are used, 
permanent stoppings or other permanent ventilation control devices 
shall be built and maintained to the outby travel point of the dolly to 
separate the haulage entry in which the low profile belt structure is 
located from intake entries. Temporary ventilation controls may be used 
in rooms that are 600 feet or less from the centerline of the entry 
from which the rooms were developed;
    (4) To separate the primary escapeway from belt and trolley haulage 
entries, as required by Sec. 75.380(g). For purposes of Sec. 75.380(g), 
the loading point for a continuous haulage system shall be the inby 
most point of travel of the dolly; and
* * * * *
    (e)(1)(i) Except as provided in paragraphs (e)(2), (e)(3) and 
(e)(4) all overcasts, undercasts, shaft partitions, permanent 
stoppings, and regulators, installed after [Insert the effective date 
of this rule], shall be constructed in a manner and of materials that 
results in a construction that has been tested and shown to have a 
minimum strength of 39 pounds per square foot as tested under ASTM E72-
80 Section 12--Transverse Load-Specimen Vertical, load only.
    (ii) All overcasts, undercasts, shaft partitions, permanent 
stoppings, and regulators, installed after November 15, 1992, shall be 
constructed of noncombustible material. Materials that are suitable for 
the construction of overcasts, undercasts, shaft partitions, permanent 
stoppings, and regulators include concrete, concrete block, brick, 
cinder block, tile, or steel. No ventilation controls installed after 
November 15, 1992, shall be constructed of aluminum.
* * * * *
    (h) All permanent ventilation controls, including seals, shall be 
maintained to serve the purpose for which they were built.
    16. Section 75.334 is amended by revising paragraph (e) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 75.334  Worked-out areas and areas where pillars are being 
recovered.

* * * * *
    (e) Each mining system shall be designed so that each worked-out 
area can be sealed. The approved ventilation plan shall specify the 
location and the sequence of construction of proposed seals.
* * * * *
    17. The Agency is asking for comments on paragraph (f) of 
Sec. 75.334 which is identical to the text published in the Federal 
Register on May 15, 1992 (57 FR 20919). This paragraph is being 
reproposed and republished for the convenience of the readers to read 
as follows:


Sec. 75.334  Worked-out areas and areas where pillars are being 
recovered.

* * * * *
    (f) In place of the requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this 
section, for mines with a demonstrated history of spontaneous 
combustion, or that are located in a coal seam determined to be 
susceptible to spontaneous combustion, the approved ventilation plan 
shall specify the following:
    (1) Measures to detect methane, carbon monoxide, and oxygen 
concentrations during and after pillar recovery, and in worked-out 
areas where no pillars have been recovered, to determine if the areas 
must be ventilated or sealed.
    (2) Actions that will be taken to protect miners from the hazards 
of spontaneous combustion.
    (3) If a bleeder system will not be used, the methods that will be 
used to control spontaneous combustion, accumulations of methane-air 
mixtures, and other gases, dusts, and fumes in the worked-out area.
* * * * *
    18. Section 75.340 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 75.340  Underground electrical installations.

    (a) Underground transformer stations, battery charging stations, 
substations, rectifiers, and water pumps shall be located in 
noncombustible structures or areas or be equipped with a fire 
suppression system meeting the requirements of Sec. 75.1107-3 through 
Sec. 75.1107-16.
    (1) When a noncombustible structure or area is used, these 
installations shall be--
    (i) Ventilated with intake air that is coursed into a return air 
course or to the surface and that is not used to ventilate working 
places;
    (ii) Ventilated with intake air that is monitored for carbon 
monoxide or smoke by an AMS installed and operated according to 
Sec. 75.351. Monitoring of intake air ventilating battery charging 
stations shall be done with sensors not affected by hydrogen; or
    (iii) Ventilated with intake air and equipped with sensors to 
monitor for heat and for carbon monoxide or smoke. Monitoring of intake 
air ventilating battery charging stations shall be done with sensors 
not affected by hydrogen. The sensors shall deenergize power to the 
installation, activate a visual and audible alarm located outside of 
the enclosure on the intake side of the installation, and activate 
doors that will automatically close when either of the following 
occurs:
    (A) The temperature in the noncombustible structure reaches 165 
deg.F.
    (B) The carbon monoxide concentration reaches 10 parts per million 
above the ambient level for the area, or the optical density of smoke 
reaches 0.05 per meter. At least every 31 days, sensors installed to 
monitor for carbon monoxide shall be calibrated with a known 
concentration of carbon monoxide and air sufficient to activate the 
closing door, or each smoke sensor shall be tested to determine that it 
functions correctly.
    (2) When a fire suppression system is used, these installations 
shall be--
    (i) Ventilated with intake air that is coursed into a return air 
course or to the surface and that is not used to ventilate working 
places; or
    (ii) Ventilated with intake air that is monitored for carbon 
monoxide or smoke by an AMS installed and operated according to 
Sec. 75.351. Monitoring of intake air ventilating battery charging 
stations shall be done with sensors not affected by hydrogen.
* * * * *
    19. Section 75.342 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 75.342  Methane monitors.

    (a) * * *
    (4) Methane monitors shall be maintained in permissible and proper 
operating condition and shall be calibrated with a known air-methane 
mixture at least once every 31 days. To assure that methane monitors 
are properly maintained and calibrated, the operator shall:
    (i) Use persons properly trained in the maintenance, calibration, 
and permissibility of methane monitors to calibrate and maintain the 
devices.
    (ii) Develop and adopt a written maintenance program that shall be 
made available for inspection by authorized representatives of the 
Secretary and the representative of miners.
    (iii) Maintain a record of all calibration tests of methane 
monitors. Records shall be maintained in a state-approved book or in a 
bound book with sequential machine-numbered pages.
    (iv) Retain the record of calibration tests for 1 year from the 
date of the test. Records shall be retained at a surface location at 
the mine and made available for inspection by authorized 
representatives of the Secretary and the representative of miners.
* * * * *
    20. Section 75.344 is amended by revising stayed paragraph (a)(1), 
redesignating paragraph (b)(2) as (b)(3) and adding new paragraphs 
(b)(2) and (e) to read as follows:


Sec. 75.344  Compressors.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Located in a noncombustible structure or area unless a person 
designated by the operator continuously attends and can see the 
compressor at all times during its operation. Any designated person 
attending the compressor shall be capable of activating the fire 
suppression system and deenergizing or shutting off the compressor in 
the event of a fire; and
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) While located immediately adjacent to a return air course 
between two permanent ventilation controls and ventilated through an 
intake control opening with a current of air that is then coursed 
directly into the return air course. In lieu of the intake side 
ventilation control, a door may be constructed in accordance with 
Sec. 75.333 (d)(1) and (d)(2). The velocity of the air maintained 
through the intake control opening shall be sufficient to prevent smoke 
rollback or airflow reversal through this opening during a fire on a 
compressor. The air quantity shall be sufficient to adequately cool the 
compressor. Sensors for heat or carbon monoxide or smoke shall be 
installed between the two permanent ventilation controls and shall 
activate a visual and audible alarm located outside of the enclosure on 
the intake side when either condition specified in paragraph (b)(3)(i) 
or (ii) occurs; or
* * * * *
    (e) Notwithstanding the requirements of Sec. 75.1107-4, upon 
activation of any fire suppression system used under paragraph (a)(2) 
of this section or activation of any system used under paragraph (b)(3) 
of this section, the compressor shall be automatically deenergized or 
automatically shut off.
* * * * *
    21. Section 75.360 is amended by removing paragraph (e), 
redesignating paragraphs (f) through (h) as (e) through (g), revising 
paragraphs (a), introductory text to (b), (b)(1), (b)(3), (b)(4), and 
(b)(6), introductory text to (c), (c)(1), introductory text to (c)(3), 
and newly redesignated paragraph (f), and by adding paragraphs (b)(8) 
through (b)(10) to read as follows:


Sec. 75.360  Preshift examination.

    (a)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, a 
certified person designated by the operator shall make a preshift 
examination within 3 hours preceding the beginning of any shift and 
before anyone on the oncoming shift, other than certified persons 
conducting examinations required by this subpart, enters any 
underground area of the mine.
    (2) Preshift examinations of areas where pumpers are scheduled to 
work or travel shall not be required prior to the pumper entering the 
areas if the pumper is a certified person and the pumper conducts an 
examination for hazardous conditions and for noncompliance with 
mandatory safety or health standards that could result in a hazardous 
condition, tests for methane and oxygen deficiency and determines if 
the air is moving in its proper direction in the area where the pumper 
works or travels. The examination of the area must be completed before 
the pumper performs any other work. A record of all hazardous 
conditions found by the pumper shall be made and retained in accordance 
with Sec. 75.363 by or at the end of the shift on which the condition 
was found.
    (b) The person conducting the preshift examination shall examine 
for hazardous conditions and noncompliance with mandatory safety or 
health standards that could result in a hazardous condition, test for 
methane and oxygen deficiency, and determine if the air is moving in 
its proper direction at the following locations:
    (1) Roadways, travelways and track haulageways where persons are to 
work or travel during the oncoming shift and are scheduled prior to the 
beginning of the preshift examination.
* * * * *
    (3) Working sections and areas where mechanized mining equipment is 
being installed or removed, if anyone is scheduled to work on the 
section or in the area during the oncoming shift. Also sections that 
are not scheduled to operate but are capable of producing coal by 
simply energizing the equipment on the section. The examination shall 
include working places, approaches to worked-out areas and ventilation 
controls on these sections or in these areas. The examination shall 
also include a test of the roof, face and rib conditions on these 
sections or in these areas.
    (4) Approaches to worked-out areas along intake air courses and at 
the entries used to carry air into worked-out areas. The examination of 
the approaches to the worked-out areas shall be made in the intake air 
course immediately inby and outby each entry used to carry air into the 
worked-out area. The examination of the entries used to carry air into 
the worked-out areas shall be at a point immediately inby the 
intersection of each entry with the intake air course when the air in 
the intake air course passes by the worked-out area prior to being used 
to ventilate working sections where anyone is scheduled to work during 
the oncoming shift.
* * * * *
    (6) (i) Entries and rooms developed after November 15, 1992, and 
developed more than 2 crosscuts off an intake air course without 
permanent ventilation controls where intake air passes through or by 
these entries or rooms to reach a working section where anyone is 
scheduled to work during the oncoming shift; and,
    (ii) Entries and rooms developed after November 15, 1992, and 
driven more than 20 feet off an intake air course without a crosscut 
and without permanent ventilation controls where intake air passes 
through or by these entries or rooms to reach a working section where 
anyone is scheduled to work during the oncoming shift.
* * * * *
    (8) High spots along intake air courses where methane is likely to 
accumulate, if equipment may be operated in the area during the shift.
    (9) Underground electrical installations referred to in 
Sec. 75.340(a), except water pumps, and areas where compressors subject 
to Sec. 75.344 are installed if the installation or compressor is or 
will be energized during the shift.
    (10) Other areas where work or travel during the oncoming shift is 
scheduled prior to the beginning of the preshift examination.
* * * * *
    (c) The person conducting the preshift examination shall determine 
the volume of air entering each of the following areas:
    (1) In the last open crosscut of each set of entries or rooms on 
each working section and areas where mechanized mining equipment is 
being installed or removed if persons are scheduled to work or travel 
in the section or area or other areas where coal can be produced by 
simply energizing equipment. The last open crosscut is the crosscut in 
the line of pillars containing the permanent stoppings that separate 
the intake air courses and the return air courses.
* * * * *
    (3) At the intake end of any pillar line where persons are 
scheduled to work or travel, mechanized mining equipment is being 
installed or removed, or coal can be produced simply by energizing the 
equipment--
* * * * *
    (f) Recordkeeping. A record of the results of each preshift 
examination including a record of hazardous conditions and their 
locations found by the examiner during each examination and of the 
results and locations of air and methane measurements shall be made in 
a book provided for that purpose on the surface before any persons 
other than certified persons conducting examinations required by this 
subpart enter any underground area of the mine. The results of methane 
tests shall be recorded as the percentage of methane measured by the 
examiner. The record shall be made by the certified person who made the 
examination or by a person designated by the operator. If the record is 
made by someone other than the examiner, the examiner shall verify the 
record by initials and date by or at the end of the shift for which the 
examination was made. A record shall also be made by a certified person 
of the action taken to correct hazardous conditions found during the 
preshift examination. Records shall be countersigned by the mine 
foreman by the end of the mine foreman's next regularly scheduled 
working shift. Within 2 scheduled production days thereafter, the 
record shall also be countersigned by the mine superintendent, mine 
manager, or other mine official to whom the mine foreman is directly 
accountable. The record shall be made in a state-approved book or in a 
bound book with sequential machine-numbered pages.
* * * * *
    22. Section 75.362 is amended by removing paragraph (h); 
redesignating paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (d)(1)(ii) as (d)(1)(ii) and 
(d)(1)(iii); revising paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), (c)(1), newly 
redesignated (d)(1)(iii), (d)(2) and (g); and by adding new paragraph 
(d)(1)(i) to read as follows:


Sec. 75.362  On-shift examination.

    (a)(1) At least once during each shift, or more often if necessary 
for safety, a certified person designated by the operator shall conduct 
an on-shift examination of each section where anyone is assigned to 
work during the shift and any area where mechanized mining equipment is 
being installed or removed during the shift. The certified person shall 
check for hazardous conditions, test for methane and oxygen deficiency, 
and determine if the air is moving in its proper direction.
    (2) At or near the beginning of any coal-producing shift, before 
production begins on a section, a certified person designated by the 
operator shall conduct an examination to assure compliance with the 
respirable dust control parameters specified in the mine ventilation 
plan. Deficiencies shall be corrected immediately. The examination 
shall include air quantities and velocities, water pressures and flow 
rates, water spray numbers and orientations, section ventilation and 
control device placement, and any other dust suppression measures 
required by the ventilation plan. Physical measurements of the air 
velocity and quantity, water pressure and flow rates shall not be 
required if continuous monitoring of these parameters is used and 
indicates that the dust control parameters are functioning properly.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) The volume of air in the last open crosscut of each set of 
entries or rooms on each section and areas where mechanized mining 
equipment is being installed or removed. The last open crosscut is the 
crosscut in the line of pillars containing the permanent stoppings that 
separate the intake air courses and the return air courses.
* * * * *
    (d)(1) * * *
    (i) At the start of each shift at each working place before 
electrically operated equipment is energized; and * * *
    (iii) At 20-minute intervals, or more often if required in the 
approved ventilation plan at specific locations, during the operation 
of equipment in the working place.
    (2) These methane tests shall be made at the face from under 
permanent roof support, using extendable probes or other acceptable 
means. When longwall or shortwall mining systems are used, these 
methane tests shall be made at the shearer, the plow, or the cutting 
head. When mining has been stopped for more than 20 minutes, methane 
tests shall be conducted prior to the start up of equipment.
* * * * *
    (g) Certification. The person making the on-shift examination in 
belt haulage entries shall certify by initials, date, and time that the 
examination was made. The certified person shall certify by initials, 
date, and the time at enough locations to show that the entire area has 
been examined.
* * * * *
    23. The Agency is asking for comments on paragraph (c)(2) of 
Sec. 75.362 which is identical to the text published in the Federal 
Register on May 15, 1992 (57 FR 20923). This paragraph is being 
reproposed and republished for the convenience of the readers to read 
as follows:


Sec. 75.362  On-shift examination.

* * * * *
    (c)(2) The volume of air on a longwall or shortwall, including 
areas where longwall or shortwall equipment is being installed or 
removed, in the intake entry or entries at the intake end of the 
longwall or shortwall.
* * * * *
    24. Section 75.363 is added to read as follows:


Sec. 75.363  Hazardous conditions; posting, correcting and recording.

    (a) Any hazardous condition found by or reported to the mine 
foreman, assistants to the mine foreman, or other certified persons 
designated by the operator for the purposes of conducting examinations 
under this subpart D, shall be posted with a conspicuous danger sign 
where anyone entering the areas would pass. Hazardous conditions shall 
be corrected immediately and the area shall remain posted until the 
hazardous conditions are corrected. If these conditions create an 
imminent danger, everyone except those persons referred to in section 
104(c) of the Act shall be withdrawn from the area affected to a safe 
area until the hazardous condition is corrected. Only persons 
designated by the operator to correct or evaluate the conditions may 
enter the posted area.
    (b) A record shall be made of these hazardous conditions. This 
record shall be kept in a book maintained for this purpose on the 
surface at the mine. The record shall be made by the completion of the 
shift on which the hazardous condition is found and shall include the 
nature and location of the hazardous condition and the corrective 
action taken. This record shall not be required for shifts when no 
hazardous conditions are found or for hazardous conditions found during 
the preshift or weekly examinations inasmuch as these examinations have 
separate recordkeeping requirements.
    (c) The record shall be made by the certified person or a person 
designated by the operator. If made by a person other than the 
certified person, the certified person shall verify the record by 
initials and date by or at the end of the shift for which the 
examination was made. The record shall be countersigned by the mine 
foreman by the end of the mine foreman's next regularly scheduled 
working shift. Within 2 scheduled production days thereafter, the 
record shall also be countersigned by the mine superintendent, mine 
manager, or other mine official to whom the mine foreman is directly 
accountable. The record shall be made in a state-approved book or in a 
bound book with sequential machine-numbered pages.
    (d) Retention period. Records shall be retained for at least 1 year 
at a surface location at the mine and made available for inspection by 
an authorized representative of the Secretary and representative of 
miners.
* * * * *
    25. Section 75.364 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), the 
introductory text of paragraph (b) and paragraph (h) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 75.364  Weekly examination.

    (a) Worked-out areas. (1) At least every 7 days, a certified person 
shall examine unsealed worked-out areas where no pillars have been 
recovered by traveling to the area of deepest penetration; measuring 
methane and oxygen concentrations and air quantities and making tests 
to determine if the air is moving in its proper direction in the area. 
Air quantity measurements shall be made where the air enters and leaves 
the worked-out area. Sufficient methane and oxygen measurements shall 
be made so as to assure the air quality in the worked-out area. An 
alternative method of evaluating the ventilation of the area may be 
approved in the ventilation plan.
    (2) At least every 7 days, a certified person shall evaluate the 
effectiveness of bleeder systems used under Sec. 75.334(b) and (c) as 
follows:
    (i) Measurements of methane and oxygen concentrations and air 
quantity and a test to determine if the air is moving in its proper 
direction shall be made where air enters the worked-out area.
    (ii) Measurements of methane and oxygen concentrations and air 
quantity and a test to determine if the air is moving in its proper 
direction shall be made immediately before the air enters a return 
split of air.
    (iii) Bleeder entries used as part of a bleeder system under 
Sec. 75.334 shall be traveled in their entirety. Measurements of 
methane and oxygen concentrations and air quantities and a test to 
determine if the air is moving in its proper direction shall be made at 
locations specified in the mine ventilation plan to determine the 
effectiveness of the bleeder system.
    (iv) In lieu of the requirements of paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (iii), 
alternative methods of evaluation may be specified in the ventilation 
plan provided the alternative method results in proper evaluation of 
the effectiveness of the bleeder system.
    (b) Hazardous conditions. At least every 7 days, an examination for 
hazardous conditions and noncompliance with mandatory safety or health 
standards that could result in a hazardous condition shall be made at 
the following locations by a certified person designated by the 
operator--
* * * * *
    (h) Recordkeeping. At the completion of any shift during which a 
portion of a weekly examination is conducted, a record of the results 
of each weekly examination, including a record of hazardous conditions 
found during each examination and their locations, the corrective 
action taken, and the results and location of air and methane 
measurements, shall be made. The results of methane tests shall be 
recorded as the percentage of methane measured by the examiner. The 
record shall be made by the person making the examination or a person 
designated by the operator. If made by a person other than the 
examiner, the examiner shall verify the record by initials and date by 
or at the end of the shift for which the examination was made. The 
record shall be countersigned by the mine foreman by the end of the 
mine foreman's next regularly scheduled working shift. Within 2 
scheduled production days thereafter, the record shall also be 
countersigned by the mine superintendent, mine manager, or other mine 
official to whom the mine foreman is directly accountable. The record 
shall be made in a state-approved book or in a bound book with 
sequential machine-numbered pages.
* * * * *
    26. Section 75.370 is amended by redesignating paragraphs (b) 
through (f) as (c) through (g); by revising paragraph (a)(3), newly 
redesignated paragraphs (c)(1) and (f); and by adding a new paragraph 
(b) to read as follows:


Sec. 75.370  Mine ventilation plan; submission and approval.

    (a) * * *
    (3) A copy of the proposed ventilation plan, and a copy of any 
proposed revision, submitted for approval shall be--
    (i) Provided to the representative of miners by the operator no 
later than the time of submittal;
    (ii) Made available for inspection by the representative of miners; 
and
    (iii) Posted on the mine bulletin board at the time of submittal. 
The proposed plan or proposed revision shall remain posted until it is 
approved, withdrawn or denied.
    (b) Following receipt of the proposed plan or proposed revision, 
the representative of miners may submit timely comments to the district 
manager, in writing, for consideration during the review process.
    (c) (1) The district manager will notify the operator in writing of 
the approval or denial of approval of a proposed ventilation plan or 
proposed revision. A copy of this notification will be sent to the 
representative of miners by the district manager.
* * * * *
    (f) The approved ventilation plan and any revisions shall be--
    (1) Provided to the representative of miners by the operator 
following notification of approval;
    (2) Made available for inspection by the representative of miners; 
and
    (3) Posted on the mine bulletin board within 1 working day 
following notification of approval. The approved plan and revisions 
shall remain posted on the bulletin board for the entire period that 
they are in effect.
* * * * *
    27. Section 75.371 is amended by revising paragraphs (b), (s), (z) 
and (bb) to read as follows:


Sec. 75.371  Mine ventilation plan; contents.

* * * * *
    (b) Planned main mine fan stoppages, other than those scheduled for 
testing, maintenance or adjustment, including procedures to be followed 
during these stoppages and subsequent restarts (see Sec. 75.311(a)) and 
the type of device to be used for monitoring main mine fan pressure, if 
other than a pressure recording device (see 75.310(a)(4)). Alternative 
methods for testing fan signals and automatic closing doors in lieu of 
stopping the main mine fan. (see Sec. 75.312(c) and (d)).
* * * * *
    (s) The locations and frequency of the methane tests if required 
more often by Sec. 75.362(d)(1)(iii) (see Sec. 75.362 (d)(1)(iii).
* * * * *
    (z) The locations where measurements of methane and oxygen 
concentrations and air quantities and tests to determine whether the 
air is moving in the proper direction will be made to evaluate the 
ventilation of nonpillared worked-out areas (see Sec. 75.364 (a)(1)) 
and the effectiveness of bleeder systems (see Sec. 75.364 (a)(2)(iii). 
Alternative methods of evaluation of the effectiveness of bleeder 
systems (Sec. 75.364 (a)(2)(iv)).
* * * * *
    (bb) The location of ventilation devices such as regulators, 
stoppings and bleeder connectors used to control air movement through 
worked-out areas (see Sec. 75.334(c)(4)). The location and sequence of 
construction of proposed seals for each worked-out area. (see 
Sec. 75.334(e))
* * * * *
    28. The Agency is asking for comments on paragraph (r) of 
Sec. 75.371 which is identical to the text published in the Federal 
Register on May 15, 1992 (57 FR 20925). This paragraph is being 
reproposed and republished for the convenience of the readers to read 
as follows:


Sec. 75.371  Mine ventilation plan; contents.

* * * * *
    (r) The quantity of air and ventilation controls that will be 
provided during the installation and removal of mechanized mining 
equipment (see Sec. 75.325(d)).
* * * * *
    29. Section 75.372 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(3) and 
adding paragraphs (b)(19)and (b)(20) to read as follows:


Sec. 75.372  Mine ventilation map.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) All known mine workings that are located in the same coalbed 
within 1,000 feet of existing or projected workings. These workings may 
be shown on a mine map with a scale other than that required by 
paragraph (a) of this section, if the scale does not exceed 2,000 feet 
to the inch and is specified on the map.
* * * * *
    (19) The entry height, velocity and direction of the air current at 
or near the midpoint of each belt flight where the height and width of 
the entry are representative of the belt haulage entry.
    (20) The location and designation of air courses that have been 
redesignated from intake to return for the purpose of ventilation of 
structures, areas or installations that are required by this subpart D 
to be ventilated to return air courses, and for ventilation of seals.
* * * * *
    30. Section 75.380 is amended by revising paragraphs (d)(3), 
(d)(4)(ii), (d)(5), (f) and (i)(2); and by adding paragraph (d)(4)(iii) 
to read as follows:
* * * * *


Sec. 75.380  Escapeways; bituminous and lignite mines.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (3) Maintained to at least a height of 5 feet from the mine floor 
to the mine roof, excluding the thickness of any roof support, except 
that the escapeways shall be maintained to at least the height of the 
coalbed, excluding the thickness of any roof support, where the coalbed 
is less than 5 feet. In areas of mines where escapeways pass through 
doors, the height may be less than 5 feet, provided that sufficient 
height is maintained to enable miners, including disabled persons, to 
escape quickly in an emergency. In areas of mines developed before 
November 16, 1992, where escapeways pass over or under overcasts, or 
undercasts the height may be less than 5 feet provided that sufficient 
height is maintained to enable miners, including disabled persons, to 
escape quickly in an emergency;
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (ii) Where the route of travel passes through doors or other 
permanent ventilation controls, the escapeway shall be at least 4-feet 
wide to enable miners to escape quickly in an emergency, or
    (iii) Where the alternate escapeway passes through doors or other 
permanent ventilation controls or where supplemental roof support is 
required, and it can be demonstrated that sufficient width is 
maintained to enable miners, including disabled persons, to escape 
quickly in an emergency.
    (5) Located to follow the most direct, safe and practical route to 
the nearest mine opening suitable for the safe evacuation of miners; 
and
* * * * *
    (f) Primary escapeway. (1) One escapeway that is ventilated with 
intake air shall be designated as the primary escapeway.
    (2) Paragraphs (f)(3) through (f)(6) of this section do not apply 
to areas of a primary escapeway where separation of the belt and 
trolley haulage entries from the primary escapeway did not exist before 
November 16, 1992.
    (3) The following equipment is not permitted in the primary 
escapeway:
    (i) Unattended diesel equipment.
    (ii) Mobile equipment hauling coal.
    (iii) Compressors, except--
    (A) Compressors necessary to maintain the escapeway in safe, 
travelable condition;
    (B) Compressors that are components of equipment such as 
locomotives and rock dusting machines; and
    (C) Compressors of less than five horsepower.
    (iv) Underground transformer stations, battery charging stations, 
substations, and rectifiers except--
    (A) Where necessary to maintain the escapeway in safe, travelable 
condition; and
    (B) Rectifiers and power centers with transformers that are either 
dry-type or contain nonflammable liquid, provided they are located on 
or near a working section and are moved as the section advances or 
retreats.
    (v) Water pumps, except--
    (A) Water pumps necessary to maintain the escapeway in safe, 
travelable condition;
    (B) Submersible pumps;
    (C) Permissible pumps and associated permissible switchgear;
    (D) Pumps located on or near a working section that are moved as 
the section advances or retreats;
    (E) Pumps installed in anthracite mines; and
    (F) Small portable pumps.
    (4) Mobile equipment in the primary escapeway, except for 
continuous miners and as provided in paragraphs (f)(5) and (f)(6) 
below, shall be equipped with a fire suppression system installed 
according to Secs. 75.1107-3 through 75.1107-16 that is--
    (i) Manually operated and attended continuously by a person trained 
in the systems function and use, or
    (ii) A multipurpose dry chemical type capable of both automatic and 
manual activation.
    (5) Personnel carriers and small mobile equipment designed and used 
only for carrying people and small hand tools may be operated in 
primary escapeways if--
    (i) The equipment is provided with a multipurpose dry chemical type 
fire suppression system capable of both automatic and manual 
activation, and
    (ii) The suppression system is suitable for the intended 
application and approved by a nationally recognized independent testing 
laboratory.
    (6) Mobile equipment not provided with a fire suppression system 
may operate in the primary escapeway if no one is inby except those 
persons directly engaged in using or moving the equipment.
* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (2) Each slope that is part of a designated escapeway and is 
inclined more than 9 degrees from the horizontal.
* * * * *
    31. The Agency is asking for comments on paragraph (b) of 
Sec. 75.380 which is identical to the text published in the Federal 
Register on May 15, 1992 (57 FR 20926). This paragraph is being 
reproposed and republished for the convenience of the readers to read 
as follows:


Sec. 75.380  Escapeways; bituminous and lignite mines.

* * * * *
    (b) (1) Escapeways shall be provided from each working section, and 
each area where mechanized mining equipment is being installed or 
removed, continuous to the surface escape drift opening or continuous 
to the escape shaft or slope facilities to the surface.
    (2) During equipment installation, these escapeways shall begin at 
the projected location for the section loading point. During equipment 
removal, they shall begin at the location of the last loading point.
* * * * *
    32. Section 75.382 is amended by adding paragraphs (g), (h), and 
(i) to read as follows:


Sec. 75.382  Mechanical escape facilities.

* * * * *
    (g) Certification. The person making the examination as required by 
paragraph (c) of this section shall certify by initials, date, and the 
time that the examination was made. Certifications shall be made at or 
near the facility examined.
    (h) Recordkeeping. At or by the completion of any shift during 
which the weekly examination is made as required by paragraph (c) of 
this section, a record of the results of the examination, including any 
deficiency found and the corrective action taken, shall be made. The 
record shall be made by the person making the examination. The record 
shall be countersigned by the mine foreman by the end of the mine 
foreman's next regularly scheduled working shift. Within 2 scheduled 
production days thereafter, the record shall also be countersigned by 
the mine superintendent, mine manager, or other mine official to whom 
the mine foreman is directly accountable. The record shall be made in a 
state-approved book or in a bound book with sequential machine-numbered 
pages.
    (i) Retention period. Records shall be retained for at least 1 year 
at a surface location at the mine and made available for inspection by 
authorized representatives of the Secretary and representative of 
miners.
    33. The Agency is asking for comments on paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) 
of Sec. 75.383 which are identical to the text published in the Federal 
Register on May 15, 1992 (57 FR 20927). These paragraphs are being 
reproposed and republished for the convenience of the readers to read 
as follows:


Sec. 75.383  Escapeway maps and drills.

    (a) A map shall be posted in each working section, and in each area 
where mechanized mining equipment is being installed or removed, and 
shall show the designated escapeways from the working section to the 
location where miners must travel to satisfy the escapeway drill 
specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. A map showing the main 
escapeways shall be posted at a surface location of the mine where 
miners congregate, such as at the mine bulletin board, bathhouse, or 
waiting room. All maps shall be kept up to date, and any changes in 
route of travel, locations of doors, or directions of airflow shall be 
shown on the maps by the end of the shift on which the changes are 
made, and affected miners shall be informed of the changes before 
entering the underground areas of the mine.
    (b)(1) At least once every 90 days, each miner, including miners 
with working stations located between working sections and main 
escapeways, shall participate in a practice escapeway drill. During 
this drill, each miner shall travel the primary or alternate escapeway 
from the miner's working section or area where mechanized mining 
equipment is being installed or removed, to the area where the split of 
air ventilating the working section intersects a main air course, or 
2,000 feet outby the section loading point, whichever distance is 
greater. Other miners shall participate in the escapeway drill by 
traveling in the primary or alternate escapeway for a distance of 2,000 
feet from their working station toward the nearest escape facility or 
drift opening. An escapeway drill shall not be conducted in the same 
escapeway as the immediately preceding drill.
* * * * *
    34. Section 75.388 is amended by revising the introductory text to 
paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec. 75.388  Boreholes in advance of mining.

* * * * *
    (c) Boreholes shall be drilled in one or both ribs of advancing 
working places described in paragraph (a) of this section as may be 
necessary for adequate protection of miners in such working places. 
These boreholes shall be drilled--
* * * * *
    35. Section 75.389 is amended by adding introductory text to 
paragraph (c), and the text of paragraph (c)(1) is republished without 
charge to read as follows:


Sec. 75.389  Mining into inaccessible areas.

* * * * *
    (c) Except for routine mining-through operations that are part of a 
retreat section ventilation system approved in accordance with 
Sec. 75.371 (f) and (x), the following provisions shall apply:
    (1) Before and during mining-through operations, a certified person 
shall perform air quality tests at intervals and at locations necessary 
to protect the safety of the miners.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 94-12054 Filed 5-18-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-43-P